Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
Disclaimer: I have never read the book, nor heard of it prior to seeing this movie last night with my partner.
The exaggeratedly surreal and over-the-top sensationalism of the film left me intrigued. Wanting more? Not particularly, but still The overall concept for the film was unique. If you take in to consideration all the tripe Hollywood is producing these days, the idea that our 16th President was not only fighting for equality for all people, but was also hunting down and destroying vampires – yes, I was intrigued. Why not? This could COULD play-out as a rather "original" idea – solely on the merit of entertainment for entertainment sake.
This movie seemed to refuse to take itself seriously, which I liked. It bent vampire myths, added a few new things to the mix and left the viewer to either hate it, or switch off their brain and just enjoy the visual onslaught of utter nonsense. I took the latter road while watching.
Sure, if I wanted to rip the movie apart, I could do just that. If you just look at some of the scenes depicted in the film: Jumping on the backs of horses during a raging stampede, the idea of vampires being so "advanced" in the 1800's to use sunscreen as a means of going out in the daylight, the fighting styles presented in the film, the entire end battle sequence on the train .I'm just saying, I could spend plenty of words on deconstructing and brutalizing this film. But I digress I left it to be nothing more than purely "popcorn" fun and let it rest.
Curse of Pirate Death (2006)
Run for your life!!!!!
Okay, so I know I am listed as the writer and even got the story credit...luckily, I know that is not true. The movie you have seen (and I am sorry) was NOT MY SCRIPT! Some of the character names were in my version, but this is not mine. This was not my story idea.
Dave, if your reading this, I'm sorry to be trashing it. But you know how I feel about this one.
If you wanna check out a Sterling Gore Fest, check out Gothic VAMPIRES FROM HELL or ATTITUDE FOR DESTRUCTION. Or even THE CURSE OF LIZZIE BORDEN 2.
I know, shameless plug over!
***Can I get an Alan Smithee for this one?***
Nothing new....but still...
Much, Much better than QUEEN COBRA. Loved the way the director blocked this flick. I mean, we could all tell it was shot at Randal Malone's house, but Lewis did a great job in keeping it at minimum visibility.
I think most of my flicks have been filmed in this house. It's a beautiful house...stunning and gorgeous.
The story was nothing original...nothing new. But still worked on this low, low budget level. The actresses were, as always in these flicks, wooden....but the creepy sorority killer wasn't bad. Just that halloween store sickle was CRAP! No new ground broken, but a well crafted and well shot flick from Lewis. Nice job, man! Sorry things didn't work out for us. Looking forward to more from you.
Wicked Little Things (2006)
Creepy, but not earth-shattering!
May Contain Spoilers!!! In no way, shape or form does this movie break the horror movie mold. Not by a long shot. However, it does deliver a creepy atmosphere, believable enough characters and gore.
The story is simple and doesn't bother to unfurl itself anymore than it needs to. A bunch of kids are killed in a mining accident back in the early 1900's. Since then, they have stalked and killed the residence of their sleepy little PA town in the mountains.
Simple: they want revenge on the man that caused their death years and years ago. Naturally, his great, great, great grandson is in town and he's a real prick.
Along with that, a mother and her two daughters inherit a run old house after the husband dies. The eldest daughter is rebellious, obnoxious...a typical teen. The younger is curious, bright-eyed and gets in with the ghost children.
The creepiest part of this flick is the sheer emotionlessness of the children and they hack their way through victim after victim. Excellent acting. It was so spooky! I mean, the Children of the Corn flicks are one thing...but this topped any of those (as for the creepy kids).
Worht a look. I bought it before seeing it and I was not unhappy. But I'm a horror fan through and through.
Santa's Slay (2005)
"Ho, Ho, Ho's"
I just watched this hilarious little flick again over the holiday's like 3 or 4 times. It is too, too funny and worth the 1 hour 15 min run time. It sets off at a breakneck pace and doesn't let up until the end. Goldberg was perfect as the ass-kicking, killer Claus.
The dialog was just plain laugh-out-loud. The characters were lampoon's of themselves. I mean, come on...it's a KILLER SANTA CLAUS, people. What more do you want. And it isn't a guy that is dressed up killing. It is supposed to be the actual Santa! I will watch this one for years to come and enjoy. Excellent holiday fun! Just don't it seriously. The filmmaker's do not appear to have, so why should you. It is just a fun ride!
Return to Halloweentown (2006)
Tepid & Bland
Disney has managed to make a total of 4 "Halloweentown" flicks. None of which have managed to strike too much interest in me to watch the franchise flourish. I must admit, "Halloweentown High" was a decent entry. The main reason I watch these movies is because they are adequate enough for my nearly 7 year old daughter to watch.
Now, regarding this 4th entry...I was skeptical due to replacing the lead actress of Kimberly J. Brown with the less than suitable Sara Paxton. All of what I thought would be wrong with this film was true. Sara Paxton was deplorable in the lead. She did not have the screen presence to hold her scenes together. Her acting is 1 dimensional and wooden. Her vacant, doe-eyes seem to be a window into a dark, empty place with no talent.
I think mostly I was disappointed with her and that is why the movie didn't work for me. I tried imagining Kimberly J. Brown in the room and I couldn't see it! This script was not written with her in mind.
I applaud her for pursuing a more grown-up career path.
As for the rest of the cast - Judith Hoag is a beauty and a talent and I was glad she got more screen time in this installment. Debbie Reynolds was a mere cameo - but can you blame her? J. Paul Zimmerman was allowed to expand his part in this film, which was a change. And it appears this film sets it up for him to be a possible main character for a potential 5th film.
Return to Halloweentown was a tepid & bland film with no meat to it! Overall, as a grown adult, I will give these films credit for what they are - Decent films for young children to enjoy at Halloween.
House of the Dead (2003)
Perfect Example of Hollywood Garbage
I start by saying this will be a short review. Anything negative that can be said about this film has already been said.
Poor direction. Disjointed script. No reason or rhyme. Flash Cuts used in a very distracting, confusing way.
Should only be watched if one is in need of inducing a coma or seizures.
Uwe Boll does not deserve the job that he has! Someone give me millions of dollars and a camera and I can make garbage like this.
Why do some producers feel we (the audience) are too stupid to realize crap when we see it.
House of the Dead 2 (2005)
Marginally Better Than The First
The original HOUSE OF THE DEAD was a joke! An insult to horror fans worldwide. Uwe Boll is and forever will be a hack in the Directors chair. There is no style or merit to his work. It is all plain, dull and over-the-top in a way that does not represent a keen and penetrating eye for Cinema.
With that said...HOUSE OF THE DEAD 2 raises the bar...slightly. The story seemed to be put together better and had a focus in mind. Borrowing elements from previous zombie flicks like DAY OF THE DEAD, 28 DAYS LATER and countless others...HOUSE OF THE DEAD 2 did not break any new ground. It did, however offer a story that was not painful to watch.
Edge of Seventeen (1998)
Edge of Stereotypes
First off I must admit, I was only 7 or 8 in 1984, the year this film takes place. However, that does not mean I do not understand the harsh reality of growing up and coming of age. It truly does not matter what year it is or what the subject matter is. In this film, the subject matter just happens to be a young man coming to terms with the fact he is homosexual.
Big deal! All young men go through awkward and difficult times in their young adult life. So what! Puberty, sexuality, the size of their Johnson....All young men have at one point questioned themselves regarding their sexuality. I am not 100% gay, but that doesn't mean I don't understand what the lead character was going through.
Unfortunately, the reality of this film is dead on. Most gay men are only after sex. Anyone reading this that denies that...read it again...I said MOST. Of the gay men I know and associate with, they will tell you the same thing. I felt this movie, as harsh and true to life as it was, did not, in my opinion, help foster any sense of pride for being gay or bisexual.
This film, though full of reality and complex situations, does not deliver the goods, in my opinion. It only makes people look at gays, lesbians and bisexuals as freaks, drug addicts, partiers, etc. And in most cases, it is a sad true reality.
The Crow: Wicked Prayer (2005)
Quoth the raven..."Please, no more!"
In the year 1993, Brandon Lee created a very memorable, dark & beautiful character: The Crow. The movie, with an exceptional script, smart direction, excellent photography and a brilliant cast, it truly one of my all time favorites. Everything from the look of the film, the characters (especially Lee as the Crow), the phenomenal soundtrack and the overall story of love being stronger than death - I was hooked! I love that film! I saw it in theaters no less than 8 times.
CITY OF ANGELS was a shallow, bastardized attempt to cash in on the success of the first film. In some ways, ANGELS almost ripped-off the original, but in a way that makes me loathe the film. Very disappointing!
SALVATION, the third in the series was...I can't even remember. I saw it once, and do not remember being overwhelmed by it or feeling anything for it.
And now, 2005 brings back the return of The Crow with WICKED PRAYER. Unlike the first three films, this one takes place in the desert, near an Indian reservation. I must admit, I was impressed with the cinematography on this film. The desert scenes, the flashback scenes, all were well done and looked great.
So...what do I think of the film? The direction? The acting? For starters the direction of this film was all too often sloppy. It appeared, more times than not, the film was confused with where it wanted to go. The characters seemed stuck into scenes, with little to no direction, and carried scenes with no skill. Each set up seemed and felt under-rehearsed and underdeveloped.
Edward Furlong is by NO stretch of my imagination an acceptable Crow! Looking too much like a gay goth groupie, instead of a vengeful angel set to make the wrong things right. His costume appeared to steal too much from the original. I felt his performance was bland and tasteless. There was no emotion displayed by his character. I did not feel pity or sorry for him, or what happens to him. I was no convinced that his love was so undying that he could be brought back from the dead. He is no Brandon Lee! I mean, come on: "Quoth the Raven, Nevermore. Motherf**ker!" What kind of crap writing is that? Boreanez is wasted in this film. Though, he has not impressed me much with previous roles such as Adam Carr in VALENTINE, I still feel he is a solid actor and really can pull off the bad guy look. However, in WICKED PRAYER, it never feels like we are 100% sure of what he is doing or why. OK, I get that he is performing a ritual to become a demon or devil, but where did this come from? What is in motivation? World domination? I don't think we will ever know.
Tara Reid....Ugh! And Macy Gray?!?!? And what was up with Dennis Hopper, in what could only be his worst performance.
None of the cast is able to save this mess! Very upsetting to see the series continue to be treated this way. What started out 12 years ago with such an inspiring beginning, is continuing to fall further down the spiral of sequel Hell!
Follow the Yellow Brick Road...
If you are not a fan of low-budget, micro-budget or zero-budget movies then stay away. Stay FAR away!!! If at the video store you see a box with a creepy looking scarecrow holding a sickle and you read the back of the box, don't expect a masterpiece.
I am a rabid horror fan...always have been. And yes, I tend you beat the hell out of most of them when I review them. Hell, I write these kinds of films (see TOWER OF BLOOD - that's one of mine). However, I appreciate the time and effort that is put into making these types of movies.
SCARECROW is by far and large a bad movie. Laughable script, 1-dimensional plastic characters, poor & sloppy direction...this one has it all.
What saves this movie? The photography! The DP (director of photography) does an excellent job shooting this movie. Several angles and at times how the scarecrow is shot are really creepy. Kudos to him! Also, the editing ain't half bad either! What I did not like, besides the direction and plot, is the scarecrow! To me, horror films should not be comedic! That isn't' to say that you can't have a good Comedy/Horror flick! Trust me, I've been plenty - but done much better than this. That is, however not to say this was purely a Comedy/Horror...I think the director was trying to make a straight horror film. Did he fail miserably. The wise-cracking, somersaulting, gymnastics crap was ridiculous!!! With most movies like this, there was so much potential that was lost because of directors such as the one behind this mess. If you watch the making-of on the DVD, you will hear the director name-drop like there ain't no tomorrow. He says he draws his inspiration from some of the greats in horror history (Wes Craven, John Carpenter, etc.) and Dario Argento....wait, what? Yup, he even dedicated this film the the Italian Horror Legend! I wonder how Mr. Argento would feel about this? Now, Mr. Argento is on my list of all time greats, but I don't see the connection to his films to this one. Oh well! While the director is busy dropping these names, no where does he explain how they inspire him. Nor does he cite references to these greats filmmakers and what about them inspired him.
Overall, a down-right piece of schlock which should not be taken seriously. Just enjoy some of the inventive death scene and gore! Don't walk away being upset cause you wasted your time...You knew what you were getting in to when you rented it!
The Forgotten (2004)
I cannot say I completely loathed this film. The mood and atmosphere of the film was eerie and creepy, but nothing we haven't seen before. Julianne Moore did an excellent job as the terrified, confused and frightened mother, who has been told her son, who has been dead for 14 months, never existed. However, her abilities start to fall apart at about the same time as the movie does.
This film begins to build a dynamic story very early on. Unfortunately, it gets lost in itself and crumbles towards the middle and especially by the end.
What probably started out as a decent alien abduction flick, turned sour and became another in a long line of Sixth Sense or The X-Files rip-offs. There was nothing that really jumped out and grabbed the audience by the throat and made them afraid for their own children. I think that really could have been the selling point of this film. The make people afraid to let their children out of their sight. I mean, the idea of this happening in real life would be the scariest part of all. This film was building up to that, but again, it crumbled way too fast.
Overall, the ending was different, but bland. Julianne Moore's character is able to overcome the odd experiment she is being forced through, because her love for her son is too strong. The alien realizes this, the experiment is over and she is the only one to remember anything. Interesting, but a trifle underdeveloped and almost seemingly tacked on.
Good try...but no dice!
28 Days Later... (2002)
Who said anything about zombies?
I recently rented this on DVD. I had every intention of seeing it on the big screen, but that never happened. Anyways...
A few years later and I decide to rent it - and I'm glad I did! In some ways this film scared me...not that it is a scary movie...but the reality I myself found from watching the film. After watching this I thought: "Wow, that is a lot like AIDS!" What do I mean...I know the filmmakers did not intend this for the film, but it was my own thought....Pure Rage reminded me of AIDS. Why? Well for starters, back in the day a lot of folks thought AIDS came from some guy having sex with a monkey from Africa (or a gorilla, or chimp, I can't remember)...anyways and people are infected if blood from an infected person gets into them. It attacks quickly and with regard. Much like AIDS. No cure is ever mentioned in the film - hinted towards- but no cure...Like AIDS! I know that may seem like a stretch...but think about it. It is a lot creepier to me to think of it in that context. I know that may seem preachy, but not my intentions. Merely stating an observation. The thought of comparing Pure Rage to AIDS made the film a lot scarier to me. We don't know all that we think we do about infectious diseases, which do not have cures.
Off my soap box now...
And who said anything about zombies? I have read a lot of people saying this sucks as a zombie film, or not enough zombies, etc. I did not think of this as a zombie flick. But instead, as a smart, grisly and edgy UK production with a healthy dose of realism.
I was very pleased with this film and look forward to the sequel.
Not Another Teen Movie (2001)
I avoided seeing this film for some time. Why? I don't know - but I just recently watched it and I enjoyed it. Though it had bland, boring moments - overall the film was funny and did a good job poking fun of Teen movies.
The musical number was probably one of my favorite parts. Along with the whip-cream bikini Chris Evans donned. Funny stuff! And of course, Molly Ringwald's scenes...by far the best part of the entire film. It was good to see her mocking the teen scene which she helped build in the 80's.
Poking fun of movies such as Never Been Kissed, She's All That, Varsity Blue, Pretty in Pink, Ten Things I Hate About You and a list of others...NOT ANOTHER TEEN MOVIE was fun, hilarious (sometimes) and overall brain dead fun - sit back and enjoy!
Reminds me of the cartoon...
Much, much better than the 1st attempt to bring Scooby Doo to the big screen. Though, if you read my review for the first film, you will see I give it a good review. Which at the time was very accurate. However, after having seen the second film - I wish I would have not been so liberal on the review.
I truly did enjoy this film much more! It had the look and feel of the old cartoon. The characters seemed more cartoonish, the plot, the sets, etc.
This could very well have been the first film, if not tweaked slightly. This one blows the first out of the water.
Big Wolf on Campus (1999)
Fun for All
Yes this show has been off the air for 3 years and I am only now getting on to commenting on it.
What can I say...I loved this show. It was entertaining, hilarious and introduced a younger audience to horror, fantasy and sci-fi..but in a light-hearted way.
Merton, Tommy and Lori are characters that were likable and fun to watch develop over the short run of the series.
I have introduced this show to my 5 year old - who just loved it! Too bad it was canceled after only 3 seasons - there could have been so much more!
Fantastic Four (2005)
Let me begin by saying I am not overly familiar with the comic book. However, I know of the Fantastic Four. I knew their names and superpowers prior to seeing this film. I knew a minimal amount about how they got them, etc.
Last night I took my 5 year-old daughter to see this film. She truly enjoyed it. She really enjoyed the abilities which Mr. Fantastic possessed. She has been trying to "stretch" herself since we saw it.
Simply put...this is a popcorn movie. Plot is not something necessary in this type of movie. One is to only enjoy what they see on screen. That is how I perceived this movie. I did not expect something that is clearly was not. I enjoyed the characters, the special effects and of course the scenery.
However, I do feel the climax was very much rushed! To me, it almost felt like this film was only part one of a 2 part film. Of course, the door is wide open for the sequel, which will surely come soon. But, to me if just felt like there was more to be seen. I could have sat there another hour or so to have seen more. Oh well...here is to seeing how long it will take a sequel to be made. Which I will go see.
I know fans of the comics will crucify, slander and hate the treat the comic received - that is how it always works. But I say enjoy what you see and don't expect something overly "fantastic."
When I first heard a New Willy Wonka film was in the making, I must say I did hold a sliver of skepticism. How could it (the new film) compare to the original 1971 version? And then I began my research. Getting updates from internet sites. Reading my entertainment magazines, etc. I still had doubts! But what convinced me to change my mind? When I heard Tim Burton would be directing, I devoted my faith to him that his retelling of Willy Wonke would be great! And I must say it was! Early on, Burton said he was no "remaking" the 1971 version, to which is not a fan, but simply staying true to the book (which I have yet to read).
To simply compare the two films and say one is better than the other would be unfair. What I liked about one - I didn't not like about the other. Example: The 1971 version was full of beautifully extravagant set pieces, which one could tell took hours/day/weeks to create. Whereas the 2005 version was cluttered and diluted with too much CGI. Another example...Gene Wilder was very clever and quirky as Willy Wonka. Johnny Depp was brilliant, frightening, clever, quirky, funny, energetic, charismatic, charming...the list goes on! Furthermore, I must also admit, with th exception of the young man who played Charlie Bucket, the children in this film were much more dull, albeit meaner than in the 1971 Version. No to say this is a bad thing...I did much prefer the performances by the children in the 1971 version as opposed to the 2005 version.
And of course the story. Again, I have yet to read the book - however, I feel the telling Tim Burton gave the film was much more than a simple fairy tale of a possibly insane candy-man.
The 1971 Version was cluttered with obstacles, which prevented it from telling a truly ingenious story. Obstacles, such as the over-the-top Broadway musical numbers, did not move the story along. I was very happy to see Burton avoided such obstacles.
The overall moral of the story has not changed. However, in this telling, Charlie does more than simply gets the factory because he is a good boy. He also helps Willy Wonka rediscover the meaning of family.
On a scale from 1-10, I give this film a solid 9. I took away a point because of all the CGI.
Burton and Depp once again prove they are a force to be reckoned with. Charlie and the Chocolate Factory allows, no demands that you suspend your mind of anything but your imagination.
I will never understand...
...how movies like this get rushed into theaters.
I honestly believe that when the idea of a Catwoman movie came across someone's desk several years back, it was a good idea. Unfortunately what turned up in theaters in 2004 was this mess! Having never picked up a Catwoman comic book, I cannot judge the film on that background. Knowing only of the old Batman TV show from the 60's, the 90's Cartoon and the brilliant portrayal by Michelle Pfeiffer in Tim Burton's exceptional Batman Returns in 1992. That's all I really have to go on.
However, this 2004 update on the character is flawed. Halle Berry is awkwardly cast as the lead. Her screen presence was boring and lacked any real motivation.
With 3 writers, it is no wonder the story goes in all directions, never sticking to one line for too long. It is disjointed and incomplete. It almost seems the script was written just to have CGI fight sequences and Berry in that silly (though hot) costume! Pitof, as director strings together a film that has no real entertainment value. Though many scenes are shot beautifully, I do not see where he treated the character of Catwoman as the focal point. It just seems like he was making a movie - nothing more nothing less.
All in all the film is bland. Trite. Scripted weakly. Sloppily acted. Well, you get the idea.
Long live the days when Michelle Pfeiffer wore the Catwoman costume. She truly demonstrated the characteristics of a true Feline Femme Fatale. She holds ranks with the women that have portrayed Catwoman - Berry, though I love her, does not! 2 out of 10
Halloweentown High (2004)
A big improvement
Halloweentown III: Halloween High, though not a stunning piece of cinema, held much more talent and savvy than that of the first two. The characters did not seem as 1-dimensional and bland. The production value was more towards the theme of the film. And the acting was much better as well.
Truth be told, I was appalled by the first two films. To me, they seemed to poke too much fun at Halloween and the mystique behind the glorious Holiday that it is. This was abandoned that lack of respect and focused more on being a family friendly film.
Kimberly J. Brown has grown into a beautiful and talented young actresses. It is good to see her give less of a "wooden"performance, as in the last two entries.
I think the new director & new writer were just what this series needed. If Disney continues to make them like this...I'll keep watching with my Daughter. If they revert back to what they have been dishing out...Then I'll stay on Nickelodeon!
7 outta 10
Pleading the 5th
Yes, I knew what I was getting into when I rented LEECHES! Yes, I know what kind of films Dave makes for Rapid Heart. Yes, I knew there would be non-stop guys-in-speedo scenes. And yes, I even knew this movie would be flawed.
So why did I see it?
Simple, I was on a swimteam back in the day and I thought: "What an interesting concept!"
Of course, all of the other thoughts in my head kept telling me "Stay away...stay away. You know what this is gonna turn out to be!" But I say to hell with it and rented it anyway.
All of what I thought did come true. Too many speedo shots, boring and obviously mechanical "leeches" and an ending so rushed and so dull I think I could have slapped one of the leeches on my and let it suck out my blood. Just to numb the pain of seeing this film.
Still, the fact of a swimteam taking on a "hord" of killer leeches was fun, funny and out of the norm!
Oh well...I am a sucker of b-movies and will be until my dying day. If they keep making them. I'll keep watching them.
5 out of 10
Hallow's End (2003)
How I wasted 91 Minutes of my Life!
Let this be a perfect example of how a movie description and box art can be overly misleading!
HALLOW'S END is trite, predictable, pointless and offers NOTHING to its viewers. The pace of the film is enough to put anyone to sleep! Nothing really seems to happen in the film until the last 20 minutes or so. However, even at that point what does happen is so utterly ridiculous, making absolutely no sense whatsoever. There is no real build up, no back story to support the less than paper-thin plot.
In all honesty, this movie could have been a great direct-to-video flick, unfortunately they missed by a LOOOONG shot! Another reviewer mentioned this movie reminded them of the classic horror from the 80's...I question whether or not this individual has seen 80's horror flicks, as this movie pays no homage to them in any way!
Avoid this at all costs!!!! This flick doesn't even offer avid horror fans like myself some kind of guilty pleasure. I was left very dissatisfied and wanting my rental fee back!
0 out of 10
Quest for the Egg Salad (2002)
Are you frightened?
Good times and a good cast make this film a good watch. Chris Seaver turns his attention from Horror/Comedy to Fantasy/Comedy. "Quest" is a good film with solid acting from the likes of Jesse Green, Tim Ekkebus, Seaver himself and all included in the cast...With the exceptions of Elegant Elliott Offen...Scary!!
Chris actually had me sit in on a Fan Commentary track to be released later this year by Tempe. I can't wait for the extras on the disc.
This movie is funny, gross, silly, and a bloody good time. Filled to the brim will all the craziness one expects from LBP!
8 out of 10
When Heaven Comes Down (2002)
I contacted Writer/Director Gary Lump about seeing a screener of his film, WHEN HEAVEN COMES DOWN, and he promptly sent it my way. I had met Gary on the B-Indepedent message board, along with other b-movie filmmakers. Gary seemed very determined to get the word out about his little film. I thought the title sounded intriguing and the character of "the savior" had a helluva costume.
At first glance, the film would seem like just your run of the mill slashfest. A crazy guy in a costume offing women. In some ways, that is mostly what the film is. However, the story unfolds much neater than just that. We have a battered, frightened woman who is tormented with nightmares of a past event/encounter with "the savior," a masked killer, hell bent on finding the "chosen one" to carry his seed, as has been ordained by God!
Sam, or main character and heroine, has tucked herself away in a shell and will not let anyone get close. Her means of exposure if helping other battered/abused women with their problems, keeping hers buried away.
As the film progresses, we are met with a few twists, some not fully developed, a few slowly paced scenes, but a climax that makes up for the bad and personifies the good of the film. Hell, I didn't see alot of it coming! But I did go "wow!" with the final revelation from our heroine!
All in all, Gary Lumpp delivers a rather well made, even if the sound if off, first film, with promise in future (hint hint) films to follow. Gary is a great guy, and a good director! I would work with him in a minute! The script was good, even if all the actors weren't up to par. That sort of thing is expected in these types of films. But, Gary is aware of his mistakes and strong points, so I am confident he will continue to make well done b-movies!
7 out of 10
Yeah! I don't think so!
Okay, I know what kind of films Decoteau makes and I know who his real target audience is, and I know I have given rather mixed reviews of the other two Brotherhood films. But this one is by far the worst in the series!
Granted, the "Guys running around in boxer-briefs" scenes are cut down to almost none. With the exception of the all too predictable shower scene...Gimme a break!
Anyway, the acting was exceptionally bad, save for the character of Lex. I was very impressed with the actors talent and scene presence. I would like to see him in something again. As for the rest of the cast: Totally forgettable!
The stalking/chase scenes took up waaaay too much of the film and lasted too long. I felt this whole movie moved in slow motion. Oh, wait, it did! The smoke in the school and that blasted lightning and thunder machine Dave uses for all his films was just down right silly!
As with all of Decoateau's films, we have the heroine clutched at knife point by our would-be villian...some corny dialog takes place and everyone crumbles to the ground!
Matt Walsh, if you are reading this...I was so sorry to see your name attached to this film. I know you are a better writer and deserve more than this! I could see where your talent was trying to peek through, but got crushed and pushed to the wayside. I am sorry, and I am sure your script was MUCH better than what was filmed! I would love to read it, as well as yours for the Frightening!
Here is to hoping is there is a part 4, Decoteau will attempt something different or new...however, I know he will not!
2 out of 10