207 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
The Grind (I) (2012)
Oh dear...
28 October 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Folks, welcome to amateur hour. How anybody who read this script, worked on set or even served tea at the cafeteria kept a straight face is beyond me. You could fill volumes of the Encyclopedia Britainnica listing the myriad of faults here, but let me have a stab:

1. There is a nightclub that plays the same two rubbish house tunes throughout, but no-one inside complains, in fact they all dance EXACTLY the same way. Often, there are large stretches with no dialogue, just the camera panning around this dive and somehow always ending up focusing on a blonde girl. Did she sleep with the director to get so much attention?

2. The thrust of the plot is of this dude owing money to some boss man, who must be the least intimidating heavy ever. Look at him on the front cover, with his little short arse and the constipated expression on his face. Yet somehow, instead of crushing him underfoot, everyone is terrified of him. Did the 6ft 5 ex-boxer fail to turn up to auditions, so they were forced to use this hobbit?

3. There is a scene here when the dude that owes money returns to his flat to find they've smashed up one of his rooms, including sprayed graffiti on the wall (OHH NOO)!! His wheelchair bound mother stumbles on the wreckage first, when she promptly has a heart attack. We then see him again later on in the same room, holding onto a shard of glass until blood drips down his hand. This might not sound like much, but the way it unfurls on screen is absolutely hilarious, especially with the 'tragic' music in the background.

4. The dude that owes money works at a generic store. To get the dosh, he decides to rob the safe. He enlists the help of his mate who works at the aforementioned nightclub, who says no. Later on, his mate has a change of heart, and turns up just as the dude's robbery is going belly-up. His mate grabs the gun to let the dude escape, and when the police turn up, pretends he was the one who committed the offense. This is seen as a 'noble sacrifice' in the context of the film. Only problem is, EVERYONE in the store has already seen the dude waving the gun around, so he has no chance of getting away with it. OOPS.

5. Danny John-Jules? SERIOUSLY? You couldn't wait a year to start making the new series of Red Dwarf? You had to embarrass yourself, your family, your pets etc till the end of time by agreeing to star in this atrocity? For Shame. FOR SHAME.

Basically, it would have been a lot better if everyone had gone home, the script was thrown in the nearest furnace and the £500 budget was donated to charidee. After all, it's not too long to Children In Need... 1/10
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1 Day (2009)
Yo, homies!!!!!
7 January 2011
Yay, just what the world was waiting for.. the first grime musical!! Yes, you heard it right.. the actors regularly break into profanity laden raps (complete with backing track) about how much they hate others and the variety of ways they're going to kill their enemies, and I have it say it works quite well. Apparently the cast wrote their own lyrics too, which makes it doubly impressive.

Less certain however, is the acting, which ranges from reasonable to just plain diabolical. I supposed that's what you get when you hire non-professional stars for 'authenticity'. Also, the movie is just one big chase sequence after the first quarter of an hour, with bizarre comedic asides involving Flash's three bitchy baby mothers and his senile but domineering granny.

It's completely unbelievable in every aspect, but somehow fun.. to a point. After the umpteenth foul-mouthed musical interlude, and yet another scene of Flash running from his pursuers, things get a little tiresome. They try to show some social realism as well, like a homeless young boy who has to steal for a living because his mum spends all her time at the local crack house, but this just comes over as window dressing.

I have a feeling that it will be fully appreciated by those who share the same music tastes as the participants, or supporters of yoof cinema who think the current crop are just too sanitised. Otherwise, it's just like an extended, after-the-watershed episode of Eastenders, with a dash of Dizzee Rascal (before his pop career started) thrown in for good measure. Does that sound like fun? If so, take a look. 5/10
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this (2010)
Average chicks with guns flick
7 January 2011
From the director of Kidulthood comes a shaggy dog story that seems to go on forever: Each girl has her little segment over the same time period before their stories meet up at the end. There are some ingenious touches here and there, but this is certainly a lot less clever than it thinks it is. None of the individual parts rises above the mediocre, and most will bore you before the end with the unpleasant characters and the overuse of street slang.

Note to the writer: throwing in gratuitous sex scenes might be a good diversion, but it can't distract us if the plot is poor and the performances aren't up to standard. It's also slightly ironic how this supposed celebration of 'girl power' is probably one of the most sexist films I've seen in it's depiction of women as either dumb bimbos or sex obsessed lesbians. It's perfectly watchable, but I can't help thinking there are better movies on TV right now, more deserving of your time.. 5/10
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
How can we can enjoy a film if we can't stand the leading character?
4 January 2011
This got absolutely slated on release, and even Sandra Bullock who plays the eponymous heroine appears to have disowned it now. It's not THAT bad. But it is pretty bad. Her stalker character is certainly an original creation with her non-stop perkiness, kooky fashion sense and random bursts of trivia she dishes out from the many puzzles she's created. Only problem is, she gets more annoying as the movie unfurls, and the saccharine ending feting this social retard as some kind of heroine is a huge misstep.

The supporting cast is better, with Bradley Cooper appropriately perplexed as the object of her affection and Ken Jeong also impressing as the most sensible member of the CCN crew. Best of though, is Thomas Haden Church as the pampered, ego driven newsreader, he has a lot of fun playing this washed up slimeball and comes out with all the best lines. Alas, whenever Ms Bullock is on screen, flapping her arms about and generally trying to be the centre of attention, all the focus is on her and the film suffers. I would have much rather left her annoying persona out of the entire script and just concentrated it on the back-biting, petty arguments between these three guys. But seeing as she's one of the producers, that would've been impossible, wouldn't it?

Anyway, the odd bright spot doesn't make up the endless, mindless prattling we're subjected to by a certain leading lady, which is supposed to be witty and charming but actually makes you want to choke her with her own red boots. So I'd take a pass on this film if I were you, and head down the Post Office where you can more or less get the same thing from the old dears in the queue. And it won't cost you the price of a rental. 4/10
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Howlingly bad..
3 November 2010
Any film that thinks we would rather see a montage of a girl preparing breakfast rather than seeing her making sweet love with her husband has got a LOT of problems. But that's the least you have the worry about in this dismal 'horror' effort, which also boasts inappropriate comical music throughout and has a monster so realistic you can almost see the strings attached. I don't need to tell you how bad the acting is and boring the proceedings are until a few non-shocking gore scenes at the end.. but I will anyway.It's dire in every aspect, a completely worthless piece of trash that's wasted the lives of everybody involved with it, and will waste yours too if you let it. So a perfect candidate for prime-time showing on the high class (Yeah, right) Horror Channel here in the UK!! 0/10
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Slave (2009)
What a load of..
1 November 2010
No reviews for this yet? There must be a lot of lucky people out there, then. I supposes it's up to me to warn them the general public about another straight to DVD piece of crap. *Cracks knuckles* Okay, sounds like a sexy set-up, doesn't it? A guy takes his pretty fiancée to Spain to meet his gangsta father, but before they can see each other she ends up getting drugged and abducted in a seedy night-club. Then, she is spirited away to a yacht belonging to a perverted Muslim (Why is it never a Jew or a Christian?) where they intend to use her as a sex slave. Her distraught beau can't get any assistance from his criminal papa, so he teams up with a hairy trailer trash bloke who's sister was similarly kidnapped by these traffickers, to storm the boat and recover his gal. However, daddy has a change of heart later on, which leads to complications and tragedy..

Okay, now let me stop you right there. Now, looking at the description above, you're probably imagining all manner of seedy goings on, ain't ya? Well sorry to be the bearer of bad news, but what perversions occur in this movie are fragmented at best, and are so laughably depicted you're more likely to be in hysterics rather than getting off to them. Yes, the director actually expects us to give a hill o' beans about this stupid thriller plot, which has been done a hundred times before and a hell of a lot better than here. In the sparse 80 minute running time we see plenty of the main character running around like a loon for 90% of the length, then we get the final bloody climax and BANG it's over. I was so engrossed I almost turned over in my sleep.

One of these days they'll make an uncompromising dramatic film where they will possibly go all the way in explaining just what WOULD happen to a pretty white girl if she was captured in another country and forced into prostitution. Until then, we'll have to made do with this fantasy version of fat blokes in colourful shirts and impossibly beautiful models where they combine it with a cheap action movie script and end up with.. not much at all. BORING. Oh and next time, get a cast that can act, will you? 2/10
79 out of 111 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Hello, I'm Ranger Bill and you're watching my sucky movie!!
31 August 2010
Come and sit by my campfire lads and lasses. Take a load off. Let me terrify and tantalise you with my tales. No, not of demons and ghouls and zombies, but how horrible a film can be on a 4 for £1 disc. This film in question is called Campfire Stories and like Creepshow and it's ilk, has three segments of 'scary' horror with a back-ended plot, in this case being of two young men suddenly getting a flat tyre on a road in the middle of nowhere at night when almost running over a girl who is having similar motoring difficulties. Together, the three sitting ducks try to find help in the surrounding woods.. and stumble across me and my charming little blaze!! Now at this point you may think you're in line for some terrifying tales of nastiness and woe, but you couldn't be more wrong!! The real horror is in how pathetically low budget each one is, and the dreadful acting will scare you out of your wits!! Because I like to be methodical, lets take each one at a time..

Part 1: A mad dude in an asylum murders the head doctor and his nurse after a lot of mistreatment. Flash forward 20 years later, said psycho is now working at a caretaker at a school. Unfortunately a bunch of youths push him too hard, and when they go hunting him in the forest, Rambo has nothing on this guy's resourcefulness!! Apart from the visceral pleasure of seeing a bunch of jock a**holes get their just desserts, the predictable chase scenes and the cheesy blood-letting make this an instant flop. The killer is LAME too. 2/10

Part 2: This is the best of the lot, though that's like saying drowning is preferable to being buried alive. Three kids on the run from the law for murdering a couple of pensioners spot an Indian in a cafe, follow him back to his trailer and kill him too.. just for his top class ganja. While smoking it though, they start to see some very weird hallucinations, and a transformation is about to take place.. The 'highlight' of this short film-within-a-film is seeing some truly awful PS1 quality special effects of a computer generated wolf and some snakes. Apart from that, it's the same old crap part deux, though the ending is a good idea which could have been scary if it was handled right.. Guess what? It isn't. 3/10

Part 3: Last but not least (that would be part 1) four teens go to a house for a night of debauchery. The guys wanna get drunk and have sex, the gals are looking for revenge for some perceived misdemeanor. And there's a strange deputy hanging outside with the IQ of a walnut. What is going to happen? Well I won't spoil things for you, but sufficed to say the person you THINK is the killer isn't the killer and the murders only take place in the last five minutes. Before then you'll have to tolerate the slowest build up since World War II, and a lesbian kiss which is a fake as plastic doggy-doo. So much for the grand finale. 2/10

So that's it, apart from the conclusion to the bookended plot which is too stupid to even dignify with a comment. No serious gore, no nudity, no surprises, not even a teeny weeny sliver of camp value. Just a gigantic waste of time, all perpetrated by yours truly. You see, I made this film.. and I did it as bad as I could as an experiment to see how many punters would snap it up without reading reviews or asking their friend's advice first. Gullibility wins every time!! Now I know I can churn out as many crappy horror films as I want, safe in the knowledge that I will make a huge profit regardless of their awfulness!! Sleep tight y'all.. HA Ha ha ha ha.. *laughter fades to echo* 2/10
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Lifeforce (1985)
Lovers of camp cinema will love this. However, I ain't one of them.
30 July 2010
A chick walks around naked for ages. That's all you need to know about this film.

Okay.. I've just find out I have to write more for the review to be published so here goes.. apparently, vampires don't have fangs. They literally suck the life out of you by using ropey special effects and leave you as a bad puppet before you shatter into snuff. Wow, forget Tru Blood and Twilight man.. this is where it's at!! And they're born in space, live in incubators until our unsuspecting spacecrafts pick them up and take them back to Earth. This is a brilliant new take on Bram Stoker's classic novel, and not a hodge-podge of ideas messily constructed into a lacklustre screenplay at all!!

And all this was filmed in good old Blighty. Brings a tear to the eye, that does. You can keep your Star Wars, Star Trek and Troll II's, this is where filmmaking is REALLY at!! Homegrown productions like this, Breeders and Alien Blood, show the Yanks where we REALLY are as a film industry!! See them quaking in their boots as we show off the rich variety of cheesy overacting, the cornucopia of Oscar-worthy gurning and the brilliance of the stilted dialogue!! And check out Patrick Stewart in his star-making role, as a baldy doctor taken over by the creature. His years of stage acting mean NOTHING, THIS part is what got him onboard the U.S.S Enterprise.

A classic waiting to be rediscovered. Once you watch it, you'll never see the world in quite the same again. 2/10
1 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
This film is CRAZY..
21 July 2010
It's hard to figure out why anybody thought this was a story worth writing down, let alone filming. Let me get this straight: you're annoyed at your sister not helping you out after her friends jump on you in the snow, you're sick of your mom neglecting you because she's spending time with her new bf and you certainly don't want frozen corn for tea. So whaddya do? Why, you trample slush all over your sibling's room, you bite your mom on the shoulder and then you run away from home in an animal suit complete with tail. RRiigghhtt.. Wait, I haven't got to the best part. You find a boat, and you set sail for a MYSTERIOUS LAND, full of strange creatures which oddly enough, look like Fraggle Rock rejects. Because that's exactly what they are. Anyway, you elect yourself their king, and being the simple, gullible beasts they are, they go along with it.

During your reign, you will instigate THE RUMPUS which is basically leaping up and down making a lot of noise, THE PILE UP where everybody jumps on top of each other before falling asleep in a heap and THE GREAT CLOD FIGHT which entails two groups of people, the baddies and the goodies, throwing hunks of dirt at each other. Among your subjects are Anthropomorphic birds, goats and buffalo, not to mention two weird owls and a huge 'dog' that roams the desert. You decide to build a fort that the whole community can live together in, and things start going very well. But soon in-fighting breaks out, arms get pulled off and your once loyal followers want to eat you.. forcing a hasty retreat into a friendly beastie's tummy..

I am not making this up. The closest movie I can compare this too was The Neverending Story which was also about a young fella-me-lad getting involved in a fantasy world while changing it. That however, had a over-riding story where you genuinely thought things were at stake. This, on the other hand, is just a serious of random events where stuff happens, with charmless characters and stupid dialogue to boot. It's original, I'll give it that, but what's the point if the movie is far more weird than interesting? As the underwhelming ending faded out and the credits rolled, I was trying to think who it would appeal to. Kids? Furries? Zoophiliacs?! Who knows? All I know is I am plopping the DVD Where The Auction Things are. 4/10.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
I would give it a minus number if I could..
29 June 2010
Well, usually I give a plot outline in this section, but considering the fact that I didn't know myself what the hell was going on myself, I'll try to be as concise as possible. A group of losers find an abandoned child, who can help them predict results while gambling, thus making them a lot of money. The local Russian(?) gangster doesn't like this (more on him later) and tries to get the little blighter. Then we have a stupid cafe worker who suddenly decides an old drunk she meets is her son, a priest who dances in his church when he is all alone, A black guy called Roadrunner(!) who.. runs everywhere and.. ARRGH I GIVE UP!!

Populated exclusively be people with stupid accents and with one of the most incoherent stories I have ever seen, it is unbelievable that this film ever got made. All throughout I was thinking to myself: What was the point in THAT scene? Why am I watching these boring people? Why is this such pretentious drivel? What's with the portentous narration? In the end I just gave up and started to play Literati on the Internet, leaving the film on so I could write this review having claimed I had watched it.. but my God, it was painful just to LISTEN to it. Repeat this film on a loop in Guantanamo bay, and I guarantee you'll be up to your neck in radical Muslims making confessions, whether they're guilty or not.

I must give a special mention to the obese gentleman who plays the foreign Ruskie mobster. Simply put, the delivers the WORST performance I have ever seen in the thousands of films I have watched. That ain't hyperbole. To look at him is to hate him. To hear him is to hate him. Heck, even his tan is fake. I sincerely hope that if he ever decides to act again, someone close to him will politely but firmly remind him what a fool he made of himself here and tell him to forget it. If he still won't listen to reason, drug him. Lock him up. Break his legs if needs be, but don't let him anywhere near a camera again. Please.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot.. What a terrible, terrible movie. 0/10
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
What do you get when you cross a bad film with an even worse one?
6 June 2010
Answer: A big ol' pile o crap.

In one plot, a Chinese couple move in together, but the boy secretly wants the daughter of a top business magnate, and when he tries to kill his current partner to get what he wants, she isn't happy.. in a co-joined storyline, a young tousled hair cop has his buddy cruelly shot down and swears revenge, but is forced to quit the police when his corrupt superior takes him 'off the case'. From then on we get random scenes of bad guys being sent to kill our renegade as he defeats them repeatedly. Neither storyline has anything to do with the other, and were obviously combined for reasons of padding. Ho hum.

Neither movie is in English, and the dubbing for both is particularly appalling.. The lead guy in the first one for instance has a very strong Aussie accent, and his lead love interest sounds like a spoilt little girl. It is almost impossible to listen to these grating voices without wanting to throw something at the telly, so best move anything heavy from the room. If you think that's bad though, wait till you see the cheesy action sequences in the next story. Sped up action and awful choreography abound, and the whole farrago is less convincing than a Saturday morning cartoon. If it's the violence that earnt it an 18 certificate, then the censors must be the kind of people who must still be scared by Inspector Gadget at the age of 30.

To complete the circle of ineptitude, both tales have notably stupid endings. Without 'spoiling' anything, the first story ends with a completely OTT scene at a church which so ludicrous it would be unbelievable just about anywhere.. but not here. As for the second, well this is the real kicker. A man has his head stuck in a tree , he's being bashed on the bonce and... THE END flashes on screen. No credits. Fade to black. WWHHAATT?! Oh dear. How sad. Never mind. It's film(s) like this that give B movies a bad name.. 1/10
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Born to Run (1993 TV Movie)
Born To Gather Dust
31 May 2010
Two brothers get involved with a gangster called Phil(!) who operates an illegal race track.. one competes in it while romancing the bad guy's girl, the other is a born loser who owes the criminal a lot of money. As you can appreciate, Phil(!) don't like either of them too much. Plus, there's police officers sniffing around, wanting the racing brother to grass on the baddie so they can shut down a substantial car racket. Hmm.. what to do..

Y'know I love my low budget unknown movies, and this one right here is a doozie. The car races last for all of 30 seconds and contain all the excitement of a game of billiards, and the acting is so bad it wouldn't look out of place in an episode of the BBC show doctors. The only cast member you'll have heard of is Richard Grieco, and he's not exactly a household name is he? And I only just found out it was made for TV too.. Wow, Que surprise there.

Good things? There is a brief sex scene, where we see that Ms Shelli Lether has a delightful body, even if her thespianism is a trifle disappointing. And another bit where the sleazebag brother (who is totally irritating throughout) is beaten up by a bunch of hired goons. Man, how I wish I coulda been the one wielding that baseball bat. All in all though, this mediocrity is only for those with a curious penchant for forgotten films and plenty of time on their hands. Like Moi, for instance.. 4/10
1 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The nadir of the vampire craze
9 March 2010
Wow, where do start with this pile of shiz..

1. Who the hell plays on a PS1 in 2008?!

2. Tony Todd has officially extinguished all the goodwill he mustered by playing the Candyman and Captain Sisco's dad. He isn't so much slumming it here as eating fish bones from the dumpster.

3. This well oiled six-pack hunk in the lead might be able to fill out a white T-shirt, but an actor he ain't. Evertime he opens his mouth, you want to curl up in embarrassment. Oh. dear.

4. Who writes this dialogue anyway? Someone call child labour on these producers: I think they're illegally employing a bunch of kindergärtners to do their screenplay for them.

5. Where's the 'sexy seductress' promised in the plot synopsis? You don't mean the ugly old tart wrapped in cling-film, with more botox than Jane Fonda do you? Whoops.

6. The fight scenes are ssoooo pathetic, they should play an instrumental of Kung Fu Fighting in the background, and pretend it's supposed to be a comedy.

7. There is a highly camp black best friend who calls everyone dawgs and has a secret funky handshake with Mr Muscle. He might as well have STEREOTYPE tattooed on his head. But get this.. HE DOESN'T DIE. AMAZING.

8. Tru Blood, Twilight, Vampire Chronicles.. ENOUGH ALREADY. Especially when the end result is as dismal as it is here.

9. The Thirst: Blood War? That title.. SUCKS (Pun intended ho ho)

10.Seriously guys.. what's the deal with the PS1?!

The director is called Tom Shell, which is quite apt as you'll feel like a shell of a person after submitting yourself to this drivel. It also concludes with the threat of a sequel, to which I can only respond with the Wilheim Scream our hunk unleashes just before the end.

It's probably started filming even now, after all it shouldn't take Mr Shell too long to muster up the 7 new pence and half a packet of wine necessary to complete production. And that would still be more than they spent on the original.. 2/10
1 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Splinter (I) (2008)
What the?! 6.3??
25 January 2010
Reverse that and you'd be somewhere nearer the truth. First of all, the SFX were rubbish, and in fact most of them were on the screen so briefly they didn't leave any impression at all. Next, that escaped convict was such a cliché.. he killed a guy, but he plans to donate his nest egg to the widow, so he must have a heart of gold. Not. Finally, even though the film is around 75 minutes in length, it feels at least twice as long. Every scare and shock is telegraphed miles in advance, so when a disembodied hand or a spike-ridden corpse does appear, it just feels plain stupid. The only parts to make me wince were when the dude's bones were breaking, and that was more the crunchy sound effects than any brilliant direction.

When I saw the nerdy botanist lowering his body temperature with ice cubes so the heap of garbage couldn't track him while he went for the police radio, I knew we were scraping the bottom of the barrel. I won't even mention the fireworks, or the explosion or.. OOPS too late. And of course we get the standard set up for a sequel at the end. Yeah, fat chance of THAT happening. Anyone who voted more than 3 for this dreck needs to go and have a good, long, hard look at themselves in the mirror. And I do mean now. Go on, off you go. 3/10
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The Meh Chronicles..
18 January 2010
Welcome to the 23rd Century!! Well that what you'd believe if you'd read the front of the box. The movie is actually set in the 28th Century. If the company that manufactured the DVD can't even get it right, you know you're in trouble.

What we have to contend with is a mish-mash of a dopey plot, lots of people shouting at the top of their voices rather than acting and tons of weapons being fired at ugly, zombie like creatures with scythes for hands who want to TAKE OVER THE WORLD. (Sorry, love Pinky And The Brain). At times, it feels more a video game than a film. If you removed the actors and put in a computer generated image of a human, it could probably pass for a PS3 port of Resident Evil.

This is especially true of the special effects, which have purposefully muted all colours save for the blood, which is lit up with a dark crimson. It looks good in a 300 inspired kind of way, and suits the comic book style the director is aiming for. Alas, aside from the action, the film gets bogged down with a lot of silly dialogue about God, faith and what-not, mostly spoken by Hellboy himself Ron Perlman playing an all-action monk (NOT Pearlman, as it states on the back of that case. Did they get a bunch of monkeys to write this thing?)

The first half is full of this tedious nonsense, and a few ill-advised attempts at pathos. Fortunately come part deus and it's slam bam fun all the way, with mutant scum being blown from here to kingdom come (nice bit of poetry there) and even a bit of sword slicing too. Thomas Jane makes for a an appealing everyday-man kinda hero, and you'll be cheering his pretty boy ass all the way. As for the other miscellaneous characters, well they're just in the movie to make up the numbers aren't they? None of them leaves any impression, from the mute sabre-wielding girl to the noble black guy who is the first to meet his maker. Yawn.

Back to the dodgy box, and they have some nerve using John Malkovich's name to advertise the film. I wouldn't even describe his scenes as a cameo, he is on screen for a total of two scenes, three minutes max. His presence seems utterly superfluous. I can only think A. He had a nice little payday out of it or B. The producer possessed a juicy bit of gossip and blackmailed the poor bald dude.

Whatever, like his role the movie is basically a throwaway bit of nonsense, ideal for a rainy day if you can't find your goulashes. Just don't expect Citizen Kane. Or Predator II even.. 4/10
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An absolutely terrible film
17 January 2010
I hate this film as much as any I have ever seen. It is stupid, hypocritical, appallingly acted, woefully scripted, and has one of the most intrusive soundtracks of popular tunes I have ever heard. And just when you think it can't get any worse, it gets all gooey at the end. Yes, this is The House Bunny, your one way ticket to hell. Please check your bags at the entrance.

So, Anna Faris transforms six ugly college girls into sexy ladies so they can get thirty pledges to save their Zeta house. This involves the baring of as much flesh as possible, and acting like brain dead morons so guys won't think they're too smart. Of course, there is the usual assortment of nasty bitches who try and vandalise the scheme, and the cliffhanger where Faris must decide whether to stay with her sisters or be the centrefold and tour around Europe. If you think she's gonna do the latter, you need to watch more Hollywood movies. Just not ones like this.

Nothing works, from the pathetic jokes about such topics as pregnant bellies to the dopey love interests. And when it tries to pull a switcheroo on its morals and gives us the old lecture about "staying true to yourself".. I almost barfed up my cornflakes. This is a film where the main character is showing off most of her tits in nearly every scene, where her young protégés only find self-worth by dressing like hookers, that depicts all men as being brain-dead sex-obsessed numpties, and they have the cheek to administer an Aesop over not giving into peer pressure?! As they say by the coast.. They've got more front than Brighton.

I laughed at one.. Count 'em.. one joke. This was when a trailer trash girl told a guy she was trying to chat up she was leaving mysterious timber in the crapper. It loses something in written form, so don't feel bad if you didn't derive as much amusement from it as me. Besides, I only chuckled because I could not believe how low the humour was. And it only gets coarser from there. Believe me, I could think of several activities with sharp objects I would prefer than to watch five seconds of this abomination again. Pass me the handsaw... 0/10

P.S A personal note to Hugh Hefner.. kindly sit around in your dressing gown all day drinking margaritas and never, EVER, try to act again. Thank you.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Nice photography, shame about the script..
7 January 2010
An escaped convict teams up with a Peter Pan-obsessed, hitchhiking girl who suffers from social problems on the road and together they trek into the 'High Country' to get away from their respective problems. But with the police on their trail and the J M Barrie lovin' lady's overprotective father close behind, can their newfound relationship last?

There IS such a thing as being too lovable, and Linda Purl proves it as she jumps around the mountain like a chipmunk on acid. Her constant chirpiness is so irritating we really feel for poor Timothy Bottoms, who is forced to shack up with her after he is shot in his retreat from the law. How he ends up falling head over heels in love at the end after finding her annoying for most of the movie (even agreeing to go back to prison for her) is beyond me, but that's Hollywood for ya..

Another thing is her so-called disability.. she says in the finale she has made 'great progress' in her behaviour, but she is EXACTLY the same twee individual that she is at the beginning. Also, it doesn't specify what her condition is.. I would suggest a particularly immature 8 year old kid stuck in an adult's body. She needs therapy, not for her so-called dedicated daddy to accept her tryst with a marijuana smuggler about a decade and a half her senior. Funny how it takes his daughter to fake suicide to get papa to 'come to his senses'. Alarm bells anyone?

Plus points? The scenery is spectacular, and there are some nice little moments, such as a helpless Bottoms being spoon-fed soup in bed or Purl's smackdown of a handglider who tries to get fresh with her. But overall, the clichéd nature of the material and the long patches of nothing overcome it, and you're left with a bit of a waste of time. Plus don't hang around for the credits, or you may just hear the worst song EVER. You have been warned.. 4/10
0 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Cravings (I) (2006)
Note: the !'s indicate something stupid. SPOILERS
7 December 2009
Warning: Spoilers
The clue should have been the rows and rows of preowned copies at Cash Converters. Nobody wanted them so they had to be reduced from £5.00 to £2.50 within weeks. However, the front cover looked alluring with sexy Jaime Winstone and Donkey Punch was an enjoyable film, so how far wrong could I be? The answer is: VERY.

Let's start with the main character, a doctor. This bloke is a complete idiot. His wife commits suicide in a bath, but after her death she constantly comes back as a spirit to warn him of danger by turning the taps on and letting the place flood(!) He knows this as he is told by a psychic plumber (!!) but chooses to ignore the advice. He then finds himself treating a teenager who likes to suck her blood and other people's (!!!) later on having an affair with her mother(!!!!).

Wait you haven't heard the best part. After he finds out she's a psychopath and nearly beyond help, he LET'S HER INTO HIS HOME FOR THE NIGHT (!!!!!) where he drinks a Valium filled cup of tea she makes for him (!!!!!!) this allows her free access to all of his drug paraphernalia, and while left alone the next day, she chucks his dog in the blender (!!!!!!!) and has a nice doggy blood shake (!!!!!!!!) All while this is going on, he NEVER thinks to contact the police, social services, the loony bin etc. Instead, he keeps sleeping with Mummy, popping his anti-depressants and behaving like a complete moron. This guys elicits NO sympathy from me whatsoever, which makes it impossible to care about his inevitable fate.

Oh yes, the ending *MAJOR SPOILERS* Now normally I don't go into a lot of detail about the conclusion to films, but in this case I'll make an exception. Basically, the psychiatrist dude has been suspended from his job for being a 100% tw*t and no-one believes his stories about canine goulash or Ms psychos friends being cut so she can have her precious haemoglobin. Why they think he's lying when there's so much evidence is beyond the pale, but AANNYYWAY...

He's finally doing the right thing (being too stupid to live) and killing himself with an overdose in the bath. But just before he meets the Grim Reaper, guess who happens along to 'save' him? That's right, lil miss Vampire. Not because she likes the guy you understand, she just wants to sample some of his red nectar.Her feeding is interrupted by an estate agent who is trying to flog the doctor's property.. She promptly murders him. Then, her mother shows up.

Now, this is the 'interesting' bit. The twist is, in a completely radical character shift, rather than dispose of her disgusting offspring, mummy actually helps carry the poor guy back to her flat (!!!!!!!!!) there, they plan to keep him alive but in a very weakened state (!!!!!!!!!!) so that Dracularette can feast on him whenever she feels like it. (!!!!!!!!!!!) Of course, everyone suspects him of the murder the estate agent so even if he did escape he'd face justice (!!!!!!!!!!!!) and BLAH BLAH BLAH enough. *END SPOILERS*

I think back to that great picture of Jaime Winstone on the front cover. Aside from the fact she is an absolutely awful actress in this, I can see why they put her on the front, despite only being third billed. She's very attractive, even when dressed up as a chav as she is for the majority of the film. Shame everything else sucks even more than she does in the role. If I was really public spirited, I would walk into Cash Converters Northampton now, buy every spare copy of this and use them as lighter fuel. But I never was the community caring type.. :) 2/10
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7 December 2009
When I think back to the experience of watching this sorry piece of crap, I feel NOTHING. My sister (who also hated it) said rather optimistically it had 'a good message'. And what would that be, a freak who is born as an 80 year old and ages backwards until he dies as a baby can live as boring a life as the rest of us? Let's see now.. he learns how to play the piano, gets adopted by a black woman, falls in love with a red-haired girl, goes out to sea on a tugboat, abandons his daughter when she is born to mop some floors in India.. sorry, none of these little incidents and worth sitting through 3 hours of tedious drama for. Plus, Brad Pitt's narration is utterly irritating and pointless, and Cate Blanchett's character with her extremely fake New Orleans accent and shrill personality will make you wonder what Mr Button ever sees in her.

The highlight of my trip to the cinema was leaving for 10 minutes to get myself a hot-dog and giant Pepsi Max at the foyer, sadly there wasn't a very long queue so I was back a lot sooner than I'd like to have been. In fact, as the rubbish plot unfurled and the couple with the least amount of chemistry I've seen in a long time spouted their soap opera dialogue to each other, I noticed small things, like the gum under my seat and how many tiles there was in the ceiling. Anything to stave off the boredom from David Fincher's cure for insomnia. Is this really the same guy who directed that brilliant film Seven? I thought Fight Club was overrated, but compared to this it was frinkin' Casablanca.

What more can I say? Clumsy metaphors (Check out the clock that goes backwards) bad child actors (Cate Blanchett as a little girl is HORRENDOUS) no humour (apart from one brief scene with a prostitute.. sorry 'sex worker') all deserve a mention, but nothing, I repeat NOTHING can prepare you for the absolute stone dead monotony of sitting through the lame-brained, pathetic long slog of a motion picture. What is it the critics can see that I can't? I honestly don't care. What I do know is while it was on I wish, like the main protagonist I could age 28 years, regress back to being a baby and then climb back inside the womb for a bit of peace. Nice & dark in there, and no boring, inconsequential films with a bloated sense of their own importance to bother me. Pass me the pacifier. SUCK SUCK. 2/10
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Gedo (2000 Video)
By-The-Numbers, Run-Of-The-Mill, Par-For-The-Course..
11 November 2009
Yippee, it's another cheapo action flick. Must be time for another of my 'hilarious' lists. Here we go..

1.All punches, kicks, explosions etc must be repeated at least twice in slow motion from different angles. The makers obviously this is cool when in actual fact, it is incredibly daft.

2. The main character must be a Maverick Pretty Boy (MPB) cop who goes outside procedure and gets the job done despite the constant threats from his superior of taking his badge away if he doesn't tow the line. MPB has an odd accent.. Australian? South Afrrican? Who cares?

3. MPB's buddy will last for around half an hour in which time they will have a handful of cringeworthy 'bonding' moments, before he is blown away leaving MPB to weep over his dead body and VOW REVENGE.

4. MPB's squeeze is played by an actress who must have the most thankless role ever. She's in about 5 scenes, in which she has nothing to do but moan that MPB won't meet her parents and is taking too many risks on the job. Not to worry, they make up by the end and she gets her tits rubbed in a sex scene with soft lighting and evocative musak. HURRAY!!

5. There is a gang of Russians who do nothing but drink vodka and party with Playmates all day long in a downtown club they own. They all seemingly have moustaches and pony tails, but their primary purpose is to provide fodder for MPB to practise his kung fu on. HII-YAA!!

6. The 'evil' guy in the film isn't such an bad egg after all, he is an honourable Japanese Yakuza warrior who only kills the target he is assigned to. MPB eventually realises this, and the two team up against THE REAL THREAT towards the end, a guy who has the most disturbing smile I've seen since Tony Blair shuffled his way out of 10 Downing St.

7. There are more cars in this film shot at then any I have ever seen. The strange thing is, the bullets don't even scratch the windshield, even when the firer is shooting at close range. This leads to believe either no one in the movie can aim for toffee, or the vehicles are painted with a miracle gloss which renders them bulletproof. Hmm..

8. A personal observation: when I first looked this up after watching it, I could not believe my eyes when I found out it was made in 2001. For all the world, it resembles a 1980's picture. The only clue otherwise is the very modern mobile phones used by everyone. Back then, they'd have been talking into bricks, y'see.

9. The name 'Fatal Blade' is stupid. That's why I haven't referred to it in the review, and this will be my last mention of those two words. Thank you.

10. Okay, finally some positivity.. There is an Asian chick who acts as a love interest for the Yakuza guy, and she is great in the part. She even handles some of the ridiculous dialogue with aplomb, and is absolutely stunning in a red dress. Sadly, she meets a rather bloody end, but her presence alone is enough to save the film from the scrapheap.

I can still only give it 4/10 though. Ideal as an aftertaste to a night at the pub, or an excuse to put off having relations with your missus. Now showing on Movies 4 Men. Classy..
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Monique (1978)
Flushing Sh**es ((ho ho)
6 November 2009
A French broad living in New York hitches up with a moustached 'erotic artist' (Try saying that with a straight face) to have a baby. Only problem is, she has a face like a slapped a**e and the dude is a complete moron. A trauma in her past leads her to behave oddly in confined spaces, and it all ends in tragedy for Ms Paranio and her walking sperm donor. She confides in a quack occasionally, who also has facial hair in exactly the same pattern. Are we sensing a fetish here?

In this load of old cobblers you have the dubious pleasure of hearing one of the worst songs EVER sung in a nightclub just before our lead has one of her funny turns. Complete with all the usual ninnies dressed up like it was pantomime season dancing around while the camera goes nutso. I mention this because it is the only thing that stands out in a morass of boring conversations and time wasting montages. Forget the sight of the young lady running from a dark stranger on the front of the VHS too.. she is NEVER in danger, and spends most of the film navel-gazing while us at home feel like shaking the neurotic bint until she does something halfway interesting.

Apparently according to the ending credits it is 'based on a true story'. Usually with that kind of statement they elaborate a bit on the details, change some of the events around to make it more exciting to a mainstream audience. In this case, I believe they filmed it EXACTLY as it happened, even down the countless scenes where she sits around in bed or stares into nothing. WHY did we need to have it turned into a movie? There is nothing here whatsoever that warrants it being given a budget and turned into a motion picture. It's hideous.

But if you liked this Mr Film Producer and you happen to be reading, you're going to love this script I've been working on. IT'S BASED ON TRUE EVENTS ALSO. My deal is ten million dollars and 60% of the worldwide gross. Here's a little taste: I was waiting is the bus queue the other day and an old man who was standing behind me dropped his watch. I noticed it was a Rolex and I said to him "Ooh, I've got one of them at home" and he responded by.. Oops, don't want to give too much away. PM if interested, I'm in most evenings if I'm not at the health club. Ciao!! 1/10
1 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Blue Flame (1993)
Er.. what?
23 October 2009
If you like to be confused, this is the film for you. A guy's daughter gets abducted by an alien, ages a decade and a half in 4 years, and tries to seduce dear old dad on a bed in his dreams. He will later have a computer disc inserted in his head by an blonde android with big tits, all the while being menaced by said alien who is a Russell Brand lookalike with a vaguely Irish accent. This extra-terrestial wants to marry the dude's now grown up little girl, but this would entail killing her so that he can absorb her memories in his head. This is his idea of blessed nuptials. Ain't love grand?!

As a lot of the film takes place in the main character's brain there are scene changes a-plenty and more costumes than you'd find in Elton John's wardrobe. Not forgetting the very dubious futuristic sets.. which consist of sparse streets with a few bits of rubbish blowing about. We get reams of dialogue about the plot that makes less sense the more they try and explain it, and lots of long, thin guns which are only used surreptitiously but are on display in nearly every scene. Is it just me who sees a metaphor here? I think the director has issues here, apart from a penchant for making lousy sci-fi movies. Seek help, mate.

Got to give some kudos to the guy though (but not much), he sure has a labyrinthine film here made with what is no doubt a very um, interesting imagination. Only problem is it is virtually impossible to watch, and it isn't worth the effort to decipher the story either. In short, it's just total hogwash and has FAIL written all over it. He should have bought himself a pack of Hubba Bubba with the budget instead (if it could have covered it). It would have lasted longer, and left more of a lasting flavour. And probably wouldn't have sucked as hard. 2/10
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A very underwhelming finale for a true legend.. SPOILERS
21 October 2009
Warning: Spoilers
"Vincent Price has stated that this is to be his last ever horror film" trumpets the advertising "He could hardly have chosen a more fitting cinematic epitaph to his legendary talents for terror". Actually, I was more perturbed by the poor guys appearance, he looks like a zombie but without any of the make-up. Besides, he's only in it for a few one minute segments, in the bookends sandwiched between four short horror tales of highly variable quality. Below are my capsule reviews, which contain SPOILERS:

Part 1: A loner who looks after his disabled sister secretly lusts after his sexy co-worker but when she turns him down, he responds by suffocating her in his car. But that isn't the end of it.. Mostly lame and hammily acted, with some unnecessary middle age nudity. (Yuck!!) Livened up however, by a shock ending (even though the special effects are very dodgy). Overall, could do a LOT better. 4/10

Part 2: A criminal on the run from loan sharks is shot but has his life saved by a black hermit. The rouge discovers his rescuer holds the key to eternal life, and makes it his mission to find it out. The best of the lot in my humble opinion, it isn't a masterpiece but it is pretty suspenseful and has another horrific conclusion.. but this one is VERY disturbing. My recommendation: watch the first two, but skip the others. 5/10

Part 3. A circus freak who eats glass and metal for a living tries to escape with his girlfriend, but his "owner" won't hear of it and threatens violent revenge if he does attempt to flee. Despite a nice messy digestive explosion, this is still extremely silly stuff with the the worst performances yet and a very dull plot. Not worth your time. 3/10

Part 4. If someone could decipher what happens in this atrocious waste of 15 or so minutes, I'd be most grateful. The broad outline is: three soldiers coming back from a war are attacked by a bunch of kids who are the only ones left alive in a small town after the conflict. Characters disappear with no explanation, dead ones return to life and motivations are non-existent. It's a mess. A complete and utter shambolic mess. 2/10

Throughout all this in the prologues, Price mugs and gurns and vaguely attempts a Deep South American accent. It's all pretty embarrassing, which may explain his state of mind in signing up for this project. His appearances are blatantly pointless, and further add to my view that the horror legend was only tacked on for financial reasons. But fans of the icon will be disappointed by his meagre screen time despite his top billing, and no doubt concerned about his poor appearance throughout. In other words, don't hunting down a copy for him.

As you've probably guessed, the actual horror content also leaves a lot to be desired. Only half the stories are passable, the others should have been thrown off a deep, dark pit during post production. You might find this film lurking on late night TV, and my advice in my write-up of Part 2 stands: Watch the first two, then switch off. As an actual movie experience, it ranks as a 3/10. Till next time.... BAHAHAHAHA (Fade out)
2 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Shrooms (2007)
Even being heavily under the influence wouldn't make this film enjoyable
3 October 2009
This is getting ridiculous now. Would a bunch of American tourists travel all the way over to Ireland to sample some magic mushrooms and camp out in a scary wood? I mean REALLY? Haven't these kids got anything better to do with their time? And would they leave their mobiles in the car in the middle of nowhere? And when they come across a couple of weirdos armed with guns out hunting, why aren't they just a bit perturbed that their group is alone in the forest with them overnight? I know I shouldn't be asking these questions, I should be getting into the spirit of the movie and setting myself up for a scare etc. Sorry, but after sitting through this sort of crap 100s of times my patience has finally snapped. Let's see what else we have here..

Oh of course the ghostly killer. It all starts with a story around a campfire, as the only Oirish member of the Yank party tells a tale of a old boys school in the area, a massacre and spirits left behind. Blah blah blah. No one believes this happened.. until people start turning up dead. Before they discover the first of the victims, we have an extended scene of a blonde rushing around shouting BLUTO BLUTO that could have been cut by a couple of millenia. Oh, did I mention this little nymphet has premonitions about the murders thanks to her digestion of an extra strong black spotted fungi? I didn't? Oh darn.

There now follows, in no particular order: dull killings, bad acting, a talking cow, a hairy wolfman, cleavage shots of sexy young things being chased.. you know the formula. When done right, this can see to a satisfying horror experience. When done wrong, you get.. well, Shrooms. 2/10
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Nick was so much better as a b*stard
19 September 2009
He stars as a hit man who has four simple rules. During the film he will break all of them, by taking on an apprentice, falling in love with a deaf girl, turning against his employer etc. YAWN, YAWN and YAWN again. I was reminded of that great movie Lord Of War, where he started off as a nasty piece of work and stayed that way till the closing credits. In this one when he turns over a new leaf and starts going out on dates and chatting with the Thailand locals, he becomes a very dull character. And as for his 'final act of sacrifice' well, I was so moved I almost threw up. PUR-LEASE.

They are some well directed action sequences on a canal with speedboats and a warehouse lit with red light, but so what? We've seen it all before. They would only be interesting in conjunction with an interesting narrative, and this one is as predictable and clichéd as it gets. In fact a more accurate title would be BANGKOK TEDIOUS. I thought that one all up by myself. Tee-hee. Anyway, the film pretty much sucks, and Nicolas Cage's career tailspin continues. Quick man, bail out before you become another Cuba Gooding Jr!! 4/10
9 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An error has occured. Please try again.