bowmanblue

Oh, dear, this one is - kind of - painful. No, it's not so bad that I turned it off, but it sure as hell doesn't match up with anything in the genre that it's trying for. If you think of the - classic - 'slasher' films then you'll probably at least hope they'll creep you out a bit (or just indulge in some over the top gory fun). 'Terror at London Bridge' is - technically - a 'slasher' movie, only it just isn't really anything to write home about.

We begin in London a hundred years ago when none other than Jack the Ripper is shot and 'killed' over London Bridge. Fast Forward a hundred years later and the bridge has been moved, brick by brick, to America (yeah, don't ask too many questions - just go with it!). And, guess what, Jack's come along for the ride and is back to his old tricks with the local women. Only one man stands in his way - and he's going to do it without his talking car, none other than David Hasselhoff.

It's a kind of 'Jaws-esque' affair from then on, with 'the Hoff' guessing that the real Jack the Ripper is behind the killings and wanting to close public events, while the profit-hungry council bosses not wanting to admit there's a problem due to the financial tourism cost such an admission would cause.

There's nothing offensively bad about this film. I almost like the premise, but there's just not that much that's good either. It's not funny, i.e. It plays it straight and it's not gory with inventive kills either. The British characters are almost cliches of what English people are like and are laughably funny, but for all the wrong reasons.

If you're a fan of 'the Hoff' you'll probably enjoy this, although, despite being the only real name on the cast list you'll recognise, he's not in it as much as you'd think he would be. Otherwise, it's just a basic 'made-for-TV' affair that's pretty forgettable, as it doesn't offer anything new to the genre.

I don't know why, but watching 'The Exterminator' made me think that someone in the production team must have watched one or two of the seventies' 'Death Wish' films and tried their best to copy that. It has the same gritty seventies vibe (despite being made in 1980), but just doesn't really seem to go anywhere.

It's about an American ex army veteran whose best friend is murdered by a street gang once they have returned to civilian life now back in New York. And he goes out for revenge. Nothing particularly new in terms of plot, but there have been plenty of 'revenge' films which have worked, despite a lack of originality. There's a cop who suspects who's the killer and is on his trail, plus the Government are sniffing around, but neither plot element really adds that much to the proceeding.

There are no major actors involved here, the script is just so-so and there's no real 'action' besides the odd killing here and there. If you're looking for any 'interesting' kills or gore - again, none here. Everything's as vanilla as it comes. As I say, there are plenty of 'revenge' films - made around the time like 'Death Wish' and right up until today - which are better than this. It's not terrible, but there's just nothing here that's original enough to make it stand out.

I was always a big fan of David Cronenberg's films. I don't always claim to know what the hell they were all about, but - being the horror fan I am - I seemed to find something enjoyable about them. 'Infinity Pool' is directed by David's son, Brandon, so I figured the apple wouldn't fall too far from the tree. And I was right.

In a fictional country - let's pretend it's some sort of offbeat island around the equator - rich Western holidaymakers lie around by the pool in luxury while the general population tend to be living in relative poverty. Nothing particularly out of the ordinary there! But the island - or rather those who pull the strings behind it - hold a dark secret that our rich protagonists are about to find out - to their peril.

I'm not sure how much about 'the secret' has been made clear through the film's marketing, so I'm going to remain vague about what it is for fear of spoilers. On the surface, it's a neat idea - and even one I can understand from the islanders' point of view. So that's good - as is the acting (even if some of the main characters are particularly annoying/unlikable). Plus there's the inevitable 'gross-out' body horror that seems to go hand in hand with the name 'Cronenberg.'

And yet there was something missing. I did stick with the film all the way to the end. And I'm glad I did. It was certainly unique, even just for the premise, but perhaps the premise was also the problem. Although I'm willing to believe in a 'supernatural' element in a story to further my enjoyment of the fictional genre, it just didn't really hold up in terms of logic once you thought about it. Or rather, this supernatural element could work once in terms of the characters, but once it happens again and again, you wonder why the people behind it are so bothered by this seemingly repeated annoyance (or rather annoying tourists!) and there must be a better way to deal with rich idiots, rather than expose them to something that they could go home and tell the world about.

Again, sorry if all that sounds a bit cryptic. Like I say, nice idea and definitely a dark horror if you're into that, but if you can explain all the implications and unanswered questions the premise brings up then you must have been watching it more closely than me!