"Free Fire" is the latest effort from UK renegade director, Ben Wheatley, following his - to be frank – masterwork, High-Rise, from 2016. Free Fire follows two different groups (one lead by Cillian Murphy, the other by an electric Sharlto Copley) as they trade cash for guns. Things of course go awry and flies jump in to the ointment with frequent regularity. I saw this with a special Q and A with Wheatley, and he told us that over the course of filming they had fired 6000 rounds of ammunition in total. It shows: Free Fire isn't going for class. It's grimy, it's dusty, it's caked in rubble and the soundtrack, occasionally - in between all the gunfire - actually has some music in it. At its best, Free Fire feels like a silent movie: It's slapstick before and after artillery. It's a real treat in the way that at no point does it really let up. It's a constant. It's a sugar rush for grown ups. This doesn't feel like a film you can pause and go and make a phone call in between. Once you've started, you strap in and you finish it. The one place setting brings up obvious similarities with Reservoir Dogs – which does bring me to the lack of characterisation in Free Fire; Tarantino somehow managed to make us feel for a bunch of colours. Wheatley, however has left it gapingly open. Backstory obviously isn't what the director was going for here, but we'd certainly feel the wounds more so if we knew a little history about these nuts – with that said, maybe a better comparison would be to John Carpenter's The Thing
Overall, Free Fire will be like nothing else you see this year (ooh, and the last shot of the film is an utter treat), so go and see it before Ben Wheatley is offered some ma-hoossive Sci-Fi budget by Fox or even Disney. @JonnyJonJon1
Reviews
11 Reviews
Poltergeist
(1982)
They're Here... and they're still just as scary.
24 March 2014
Poltergeist is one of those scarier cult movies that you might stumble upon late at night and end up watching the whole thing. Do it. Because it's one of the better 80s horror's that you'll find.
We open on a television set, as the American national anthem plays and we see out the end of the broadcast day. Already it's a weirdly creepy film, and the national anthem hasn't been as haunting as this since Hendrix. Set in a quaint little American neighbourhood, kids play, guys drink beer and watch football. With a hand from Spielberg, the town looks like a carbon copy of E.T., but instead of a misguided little alien (the two films were released within weeks of one another) there's something much worse coming for our suburban American family as their house is taken over by ghosts.
With a good cast, including JoBeth Williams in a Sigourney Weaver/Carrie Fisher-esque mother/wife role and Heather O'Rourke as the horror-trope creepy/cute child it's decent stuff. But it is Craig T. Nelson who heads the family and leads the cast as the spot-on average man. He's not particularly smart, or even attractive (joking about his gut in the mirror at one point), but here he is perfect as the hauntings worsen, staying strong and believable as the loving father and husband throughout.
With some fantastic effects, Poltergeist harnesses both practical (One scene involving a reflection in a mirror is a Scanners-rewind-as-many- times-as-possible-type moment) and digital effects (many scenes remind us of the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark, another Spielberg classic) to really get the fear in to us and which, for the most part, still look excellent today.
The one noticeable downside is the pacing. I'm not usually a stickler for this, but just after the sixty minute mark that the film seems to sag: While more (arguably interesting) characters are introduced, it slows the pace down to a crawl and leaves the film bland and - worst of all - not that scary. It's not really until the last twenty-five or so that the film starts running again, perhaps even saving the whole picture.
Poltergeist is one of those kind of movies that you'll watch, then realise that this is the film that you've been quoting all those times without knowing. Paving the way for (much lesser) scary pics, and referenced time and time again in the likes of the earlier Treehouse of Horrors, Poltergeist is like an art-house Paranormal Activity, a true gem which should be viewed (and enjoyed) as many times as possible before the inevitably terrible remake arrives...
Twitter: @JonnyJonJon1
We open on a television set, as the American national anthem plays and we see out the end of the broadcast day. Already it's a weirdly creepy film, and the national anthem hasn't been as haunting as this since Hendrix. Set in a quaint little American neighbourhood, kids play, guys drink beer and watch football. With a hand from Spielberg, the town looks like a carbon copy of E.T., but instead of a misguided little alien (the two films were released within weeks of one another) there's something much worse coming for our suburban American family as their house is taken over by ghosts.
With a good cast, including JoBeth Williams in a Sigourney Weaver/Carrie Fisher-esque mother/wife role and Heather O'Rourke as the horror-trope creepy/cute child it's decent stuff. But it is Craig T. Nelson who heads the family and leads the cast as the spot-on average man. He's not particularly smart, or even attractive (joking about his gut in the mirror at one point), but here he is perfect as the hauntings worsen, staying strong and believable as the loving father and husband throughout.
With some fantastic effects, Poltergeist harnesses both practical (One scene involving a reflection in a mirror is a Scanners-rewind-as-many- times-as-possible-type moment) and digital effects (many scenes remind us of the end of Raiders of the Lost Ark, another Spielberg classic) to really get the fear in to us and which, for the most part, still look excellent today.
The one noticeable downside is the pacing. I'm not usually a stickler for this, but just after the sixty minute mark that the film seems to sag: While more (arguably interesting) characters are introduced, it slows the pace down to a crawl and leaves the film bland and - worst of all - not that scary. It's not really until the last twenty-five or so that the film starts running again, perhaps even saving the whole picture.
Poltergeist is one of those kind of movies that you'll watch, then realise that this is the film that you've been quoting all those times without knowing. Paving the way for (much lesser) scary pics, and referenced time and time again in the likes of the earlier Treehouse of Horrors, Poltergeist is like an art-house Paranormal Activity, a true gem which should be viewed (and enjoyed) as many times as possible before the inevitably terrible remake arrives...
Twitter: @JonnyJonJon1
Predators
(2010)
If It Bleeds We Can Sell It
12 March 2014
Predators, a belated sequel to Arnold Schwarzenegger's third best film (-- not an insult, the man made lots of incredible movies), stars Adrien Brody as a grizzled mercenary on an alien planet as he and a ragtag team of other brutes try to survive against the aforementioned Predators.
This film could have been great. An impressive-enough cast with lots of possibly interesting characters against the odds: these odds being one of the better antagonists in Sci-fi film history. It's just a shame that while this film tries to riff on anything and everything that made the original '87 Predator brilliant comes off here as theft, as it borrows and homages too often. Without giving anything away here, this film changes a few key details from the original film but really does just use the exact same plot, taking it as its own and changing the characters from unwitting soldiers to unlikeable mercenaries. Whereas this idea is supposed to be a momento, a love letter to the first film, it instead plays out as lazy here (I was astonished to see that there's even a beat from the first Alien Vs Predator movie!), and while this isn't a remake or a "re-imagining" - or whatever words a Hollywood exec might use - it does, however, appear as one.
Adrien Brody is an awful casting choice. This is a man who is a Wes Anderson regular - not someone who dispatches monsters for fun. And Brody spends the whole movie doing his best Christian Bale/Batman impression while elsewhere none of the other characters seem to grow or evolve as people, which is draining as they aren't particularly likable to start off with; each of them seeming to have some kind of assassin/criminal backstory to them. Danny Trejo, a perfect example, is gruff and no-nonsense Mexican-Drug-Cartel-Type here, playing it almost like he was in preparation for his Machete character (and by the time the credits finally roll you get the horrible realisation: Robert Rodriguez produced).
There are positives here and there; the Predator itself is impressive for the most part and the film is welcoming in its violence, something that seems so rare in film these days. The scenery is lush and there are lots of cool angles from a technical point of view.
Overall, Predators will do. But it's exactly that mentality that makes it so very disappointing. While the Xenomorph Alien has done its best to kill the Arnie memory and Predator as a whole for good, "Predators" adds very little to the franchise and treads far too close to the original. It really is sad to see the lack of creativity with such pulpy and already-proved source material.
@JonnyJonJon1
This film could have been great. An impressive-enough cast with lots of possibly interesting characters against the odds: these odds being one of the better antagonists in Sci-fi film history. It's just a shame that while this film tries to riff on anything and everything that made the original '87 Predator brilliant comes off here as theft, as it borrows and homages too often. Without giving anything away here, this film changes a few key details from the original film but really does just use the exact same plot, taking it as its own and changing the characters from unwitting soldiers to unlikeable mercenaries. Whereas this idea is supposed to be a momento, a love letter to the first film, it instead plays out as lazy here (I was astonished to see that there's even a beat from the first Alien Vs Predator movie!), and while this isn't a remake or a "re-imagining" - or whatever words a Hollywood exec might use - it does, however, appear as one.
Adrien Brody is an awful casting choice. This is a man who is a Wes Anderson regular - not someone who dispatches monsters for fun. And Brody spends the whole movie doing his best Christian Bale/Batman impression while elsewhere none of the other characters seem to grow or evolve as people, which is draining as they aren't particularly likable to start off with; each of them seeming to have some kind of assassin/criminal backstory to them. Danny Trejo, a perfect example, is gruff and no-nonsense Mexican-Drug-Cartel-Type here, playing it almost like he was in preparation for his Machete character (and by the time the credits finally roll you get the horrible realisation: Robert Rodriguez produced).
There are positives here and there; the Predator itself is impressive for the most part and the film is welcoming in its violence, something that seems so rare in film these days. The scenery is lush and there are lots of cool angles from a technical point of view.
Overall, Predators will do. But it's exactly that mentality that makes it so very disappointing. While the Xenomorph Alien has done its best to kill the Arnie memory and Predator as a whole for good, "Predators" adds very little to the franchise and treads far too close to the original. It really is sad to see the lack of creativity with such pulpy and already-proved source material.
@JonnyJonJon1
The Hungover Games
(2014)
No Hangover Cure
12 February 2014
The Hungover Games is the latest sluggish addition to the "Let's parody anything that might be remotely funny" category of film, lampooning The Hunger Games (duh), Ted, The Hangover series, Carrie, Django Unchained and others.
This film steals so much from its peers, while at the same time lacking so many of its own original ideas that our main characters are actually taken directly from The Hangover. And for the most part, the storyline, or at least the first fifthteen minutes is also exactly the same as the 2009 Vegas Comedy. Just like in those movies, the fourth friend of the group is misplaced, leaving the first three to try and remember all the terrible things that they did the night before, in an attempt to rediscover him. I know this is a parody, but really? Word-for-word lines from The Hangover have been pilfered as their own. It's astonishing the true lack of any creativity that The Hungover Games possesses, whereas other awful spoof movies such as, say, Scary/Epic Movie seem to have some (very few) of their own ideas, here, "writers" Kyle Barnett Anderson et al, make it feel like they've photocopied Todd Philips' screenplay badly and then taken it for themselves.
But it turns out our three buddies have been transported to Hunger Games Land where they have to fight to the death with all the other favourable movies of the last seven years or so. This takes all those films you may have possibly enjoyed over the past few years and throws them in to one terrible mush: watch as the Ted bear has a penis, Katniss Everdeen has had her name changed to "Katnip" (HA!), and Willy Wonka is a homosexual. Add to that pops at race, some Human Centipede "jokes", underage sex gags and just a little bit of necrophilia and you experience an hour and a half of pure film diabolica. And for the people who defend the jokes for being jokes, perhaps if they were funny, fine, but otherwise it just comes off as offensive and downright lazy. The brow for this movie is so low that it's scraping along the ground.
I'll end on the only two positives: The people who play the Hangover team are very convincing, and the film itself is shot quite nicely. Otherwise, please, do not go and see this movie. I would rather have been dispatched by a Hunger Games arrow to the face then to have seen this film. Run – sprint, even – away if someone suggests watching this piece of garbage.
@JonnyJonJon1
This film steals so much from its peers, while at the same time lacking so many of its own original ideas that our main characters are actually taken directly from The Hangover. And for the most part, the storyline, or at least the first fifthteen minutes is also exactly the same as the 2009 Vegas Comedy. Just like in those movies, the fourth friend of the group is misplaced, leaving the first three to try and remember all the terrible things that they did the night before, in an attempt to rediscover him. I know this is a parody, but really? Word-for-word lines from The Hangover have been pilfered as their own. It's astonishing the true lack of any creativity that The Hungover Games possesses, whereas other awful spoof movies such as, say, Scary/Epic Movie seem to have some (very few) of their own ideas, here, "writers" Kyle Barnett Anderson et al, make it feel like they've photocopied Todd Philips' screenplay badly and then taken it for themselves.
But it turns out our three buddies have been transported to Hunger Games Land where they have to fight to the death with all the other favourable movies of the last seven years or so. This takes all those films you may have possibly enjoyed over the past few years and throws them in to one terrible mush: watch as the Ted bear has a penis, Katniss Everdeen has had her name changed to "Katnip" (HA!), and Willy Wonka is a homosexual. Add to that pops at race, some Human Centipede "jokes", underage sex gags and just a little bit of necrophilia and you experience an hour and a half of pure film diabolica. And for the people who defend the jokes for being jokes, perhaps if they were funny, fine, but otherwise it just comes off as offensive and downright lazy. The brow for this movie is so low that it's scraping along the ground.
I'll end on the only two positives: The people who play the Hangover team are very convincing, and the film itself is shot quite nicely. Otherwise, please, do not go and see this movie. I would rather have been dispatched by a Hunger Games arrow to the face then to have seen this film. Run – sprint, even – away if someone suggests watching this piece of garbage.
@JonnyJonJon1
Evil Dead
(2013)
Give Me Back My (Cash in) Hand!
23 January 2014
Let me start by saying that I am a massive Evil Dead fan, and believe that Evil Dead II is one of the greatest sequels ever. With that said, I went in to the Evil Dead Remake, boomstick in hand ready to shoot myself when I sensed a bad movie.
Evil Dead 2013 continues Hollywood's sluggish attempt to bring back every horror movie you ever loved and squash it, taking as much joy and charm away from its original film that it actually pains you. Surely, they would have learned from My Bloody Valentine 3D, right? Wrong.
The story here is pretty much the same, and actually probably more coherent to begin with than ED 1 & 2 - as five teens go to a Cabin In The Woods to support their drug addicted member through the next few days as she tries to go cold turkey. Unfortunately for her and the rest of Scooby Doo-esque gang of friends, an evil book is discovered...
The main problem with this film is its lack of charisma. All of the fresh faced leads are useless and stereotypical to the genre. Gone is the amazing/terrible acting display of the brilliant/awful Bruce Campbell, replaced instead with "Shiloh Fernandez". I'm fine with bad acting (look back at any of your favourite horror films - they will all have someone with the facial expressions of a tree, or "Lacktors" if you will), but apart from looking pretty, Fernandez has literally nothing otherwise that stops you from wanting to see him killed by something horrible in these evil woods.
Gone too is literally any kind of humour. hile ED2 had this bizarre twisted funny bone running through it, this movie doesn't even attempt it. No lines, no puppets, no deer head, nothing. This isn't a bad thing, because I'd argue that Army of Darkness (the third in the Evil Dead series) went a little too over the top. But not even a line? A sly reference to the original? Nope. Nothing. Going back to other bad horror remakes, I can remember that even Friday the 13th 2009 had a few stabs (!) at it.
On saying that, I did laugh twice at unintentionally hysterical parts, both involving Jane Levy. Our addicted heroine of sorts, while becoming possessed, she witnesses lots of strange things, and just look out for her reflection... it's stupidly hilarious.
Which leads me on to the deaths. This film was given an 18 certificate in the UK, something so rare these days, which'll be a result of this being actually a mash up of both ED part 1 and 2, pilfering the best bits from both of them. With that comes lots of the makeshift weapons used in both, tweaked ever so slightly. Like the originals, this movie's best moments come from the practical effects: lots of blood, tongues, hands, etc, with one scene involving a razor blade standing out, and giving you your only scene where you stop and go "Wow, that's not terrible and looks actually quite good". Unfortunately, that is the only highlight. Otherwise, each death is really rather flat, dull even.
If you want to do a remake involve George Romero (Dawn of the Dead 2004 and The Crazies 2010 were both inferior but great), otherwise please please stay away, as films like this are straight up painful to sit through.
In the Evil Dead movies the characters are possessed by evil spirits and turned in to monsters. It's just a shame Evil Dead 2013 has been taken over by something so unscary, lifeless and frankly boring that it makes you want to cut off your own hand and chase yourself out of the cinema with it.
@JonnyJonJon1
Evil Dead 2013 continues Hollywood's sluggish attempt to bring back every horror movie you ever loved and squash it, taking as much joy and charm away from its original film that it actually pains you. Surely, they would have learned from My Bloody Valentine 3D, right? Wrong.
The story here is pretty much the same, and actually probably more coherent to begin with than ED 1 & 2 - as five teens go to a Cabin In The Woods to support their drug addicted member through the next few days as she tries to go cold turkey. Unfortunately for her and the rest of Scooby Doo-esque gang of friends, an evil book is discovered...
The main problem with this film is its lack of charisma. All of the fresh faced leads are useless and stereotypical to the genre. Gone is the amazing/terrible acting display of the brilliant/awful Bruce Campbell, replaced instead with "Shiloh Fernandez". I'm fine with bad acting (look back at any of your favourite horror films - they will all have someone with the facial expressions of a tree, or "Lacktors" if you will), but apart from looking pretty, Fernandez has literally nothing otherwise that stops you from wanting to see him killed by something horrible in these evil woods.
Gone too is literally any kind of humour. hile ED2 had this bizarre twisted funny bone running through it, this movie doesn't even attempt it. No lines, no puppets, no deer head, nothing. This isn't a bad thing, because I'd argue that Army of Darkness (the third in the Evil Dead series) went a little too over the top. But not even a line? A sly reference to the original? Nope. Nothing. Going back to other bad horror remakes, I can remember that even Friday the 13th 2009 had a few stabs (!) at it.
On saying that, I did laugh twice at unintentionally hysterical parts, both involving Jane Levy. Our addicted heroine of sorts, while becoming possessed, she witnesses lots of strange things, and just look out for her reflection... it's stupidly hilarious.
Which leads me on to the deaths. This film was given an 18 certificate in the UK, something so rare these days, which'll be a result of this being actually a mash up of both ED part 1 and 2, pilfering the best bits from both of them. With that comes lots of the makeshift weapons used in both, tweaked ever so slightly. Like the originals, this movie's best moments come from the practical effects: lots of blood, tongues, hands, etc, with one scene involving a razor blade standing out, and giving you your only scene where you stop and go "Wow, that's not terrible and looks actually quite good". Unfortunately, that is the only highlight. Otherwise, each death is really rather flat, dull even.
If you want to do a remake involve George Romero (Dawn of the Dead 2004 and The Crazies 2010 were both inferior but great), otherwise please please stay away, as films like this are straight up painful to sit through.
In the Evil Dead movies the characters are possessed by evil spirits and turned in to monsters. It's just a shame Evil Dead 2013 has been taken over by something so unscary, lifeless and frankly boring that it makes you want to cut off your own hand and chase yourself out of the cinema with it.
@JonnyJonJon1
The Blair Witch Project
(1999)
If You Go Down To the Woods in the 90s...
21 January 2014
The Blair Witch Project, the film that, more or less, created the Found Footage Horror sub-genre; paving the way for the likes of the Paranormal Activities, the RECs, and Cloverfield. But don't judge it on those (really quite average) movies, because The Blair Witch Project is extraordinarily terrifying. Even writing this now, reminiscing about the film is filling me with fear. It really is that scary.
We join Heather, her friend Josh and Mike (hired because he can work a video camera) as they adventure in to the woods to find out more about the eponymous Blair Witch, aiming to make a cheap documentary type movie on the fairly blurred subject. As you can expect, things soon get creepy...
Genre conventions pop up about the place from the off: unwitting teens, small town-folk, and so on, but it really just works as the characters (keeping their real life names as in Found Footage tradition) bicker and gradually break down from fear.
And there's a lot of darkness. As the kids sit within their tent, in a hope that the creepy noises outside won't get them, we, the audience, are forced to watch a blank screen, just listening to growls outside and the scared banter inside. Just like Paranormal Activity, something the makers of that film quite right jumped on, your eyes dart around this screen, literally looking at nothing, as you wait, petrified, for something to jump out at you.
And that's exactly where the film quite rightly collects its haters. Not full of conventional scares, you're supposed to believe in the characters' fears, their terror of what COULD be out there. You're tasked with believing in the possible evil out there, as opposed to bluntly throwing it at you. Yes, there are bits here and there, visible to us which are horrifying, but the real fear? Our fantastic imagination.
Today, almost 15 years on, The Blair Witch Project may well be devalued by its less scary descendants (avoid Apollo 18 at all costs), and perhaps with repeat viewings it could easily become tame. But if today's Found Footage movies are Blair Witch's children, then TBWP is their far smarter, pitch black and, most importantly, scarier dad.
Watch it with the lights off.
Twitter: @JonnyJonJon1
We join Heather, her friend Josh and Mike (hired because he can work a video camera) as they adventure in to the woods to find out more about the eponymous Blair Witch, aiming to make a cheap documentary type movie on the fairly blurred subject. As you can expect, things soon get creepy...
Genre conventions pop up about the place from the off: unwitting teens, small town-folk, and so on, but it really just works as the characters (keeping their real life names as in Found Footage tradition) bicker and gradually break down from fear.
And there's a lot of darkness. As the kids sit within their tent, in a hope that the creepy noises outside won't get them, we, the audience, are forced to watch a blank screen, just listening to growls outside and the scared banter inside. Just like Paranormal Activity, something the makers of that film quite right jumped on, your eyes dart around this screen, literally looking at nothing, as you wait, petrified, for something to jump out at you.
And that's exactly where the film quite rightly collects its haters. Not full of conventional scares, you're supposed to believe in the characters' fears, their terror of what COULD be out there. You're tasked with believing in the possible evil out there, as opposed to bluntly throwing it at you. Yes, there are bits here and there, visible to us which are horrifying, but the real fear? Our fantastic imagination.
Today, almost 15 years on, The Blair Witch Project may well be devalued by its less scary descendants (avoid Apollo 18 at all costs), and perhaps with repeat viewings it could easily become tame. But if today's Found Footage movies are Blair Witch's children, then TBWP is their far smarter, pitch black and, most importantly, scarier dad.
Watch it with the lights off.
Twitter: @JonnyJonJon1
Good Grandpa
29 October 2013
Johnny Knoxville, figurehead of "Jackass", stars here as Irving Zisman. Having just had his prison-bound daughter drop off her son (and his grandson), Billy (Irving: "Bobby"?), the 86-year-old is stuck with the child as he drives him to Billy's complete loser of a father, across country.
The story here pretty much acts as an A to B for the movie and gives the characters an excuse to get in as many crazy situations as possible, in the same kind of way that "Borat" does, as the two attend a funeral, a wedding and a strip club...
Kudos to the team for making Irving Zisman believable, whenever seen in the Jackass films Irving is only seen one sketch at time, always making us laugh but never letting us connect. But give him a whole movie and you really feel for the old coot. And though he may be caked in Old Man Makeup you actually get to see some range in Knoxville, usually playing it safe as the comedy relief in forgettable movies like "The Last Stand" or "Walking Tall"...
Whether he'll become the talking point of the film or not, Jackson Nicoll, who plays Billy is a standout: For him to come out of nowhere and partner Knoxville in a movie with such assured confidence is astonishing and you will not see a more natural and realistic display from a child for a good while. And again, hats off to the Jackass guys for making the interplay between the Billy and Irving oddly sweet in a film so full of swearing and testicles. Even if the two are just talking about going fishing, it really is believable and really quite lovely.
If you don't like Jackass then you won't enjoy this. But if you do, get your "serving of Irving" and prepare yourself to cry with laughter like I did.
Twitter: @JonnyJonJon1
The story here pretty much acts as an A to B for the movie and gives the characters an excuse to get in as many crazy situations as possible, in the same kind of way that "Borat" does, as the two attend a funeral, a wedding and a strip club...
Kudos to the team for making Irving Zisman believable, whenever seen in the Jackass films Irving is only seen one sketch at time, always making us laugh but never letting us connect. But give him a whole movie and you really feel for the old coot. And though he may be caked in Old Man Makeup you actually get to see some range in Knoxville, usually playing it safe as the comedy relief in forgettable movies like "The Last Stand" or "Walking Tall"...
Whether he'll become the talking point of the film or not, Jackson Nicoll, who plays Billy is a standout: For him to come out of nowhere and partner Knoxville in a movie with such assured confidence is astonishing and you will not see a more natural and realistic display from a child for a good while. And again, hats off to the Jackass guys for making the interplay between the Billy and Irving oddly sweet in a film so full of swearing and testicles. Even if the two are just talking about going fishing, it really is believable and really quite lovely.
If you don't like Jackass then you won't enjoy this. But if you do, get your "serving of Irving" and prepare yourself to cry with laughter like I did.
Twitter: @JonnyJonJon1
Observe and Report
(2009)
Observe And Complain
6 October 2013
Halfway in to "Observe and Report", having just found out that Seth Rogen isn't going to achieve his dream job of Police Officer (having failed the psychological part of the exam), a man reveals himself from the closet (hiding in there to get a cheap laugh out of Rogen's failure) and says: "I thought this was going to be kinda funny, but, it's actually kind of sad". It's too bad the makers of this film didn't take that line out because it gives reviewers like myself a perfect tagline to sum up the whole film.
Seth Rogen plays Ronnie, a determined - if obsessive - mall cop who one day plans of becoming a Police Officer, enforce the law and conquer his love in the form of an Anna Faris.
It's written and directed by Jody Hill and what little humour there actually is is just the darkest you'll find anywhere. With maybe one big laugh at the end, it's not exactly hilarious. A good example of this and a big talking point whenever the film is brought up is the Rape/Not Rape scene - by now Anna Faris is out of it on shots and Ronnie's own medication while Ronnie has sex on top of her. Noticing that she's unconscious, Rogen stops. But Faris instantly comes up with a "Why are you stopping motherfuXXer?". It's a scene played for laughs, but you're not really sure if you should be laughing.
Faris, usually playing characters out of the depth and ditsy, is a welcome change as an unlikeable cheat and partier and is actually in one of her better roles, showing us how good a comic she actually is. It does say something though when your best character is being played by Anna Faris of "Scary Movie", "Yogi Bear" and "Movie 43" fame though...
Other supporting cast are considerably less fun: Ray Liotta does very little as a cop, while - still a good few years away from End Of Watch brilliance and still in his supporting comic character mold - Michael Pena puts on an irritating voice throughout (and don't even get me started on the always awful Aziz Ansari who's character's name is literally "Saddamn").
Even on release, Observe was up against it; pitting itself up against Paul Blart: Mall Cop. And the similarities of the two films are eerily similar. What both films do seem to miss though is the fact that literally no-one finds the subject of an overweight mall security guard interesting.
With very little to like and a supporting cast chiseling away at your patience, "Observe and Report" features minimal laughs and an unlikeable Seth Rogen. Observe and Report is not remotely a good film. At least the soundtrack's alright though... I suppose that's something.
Seth Rogen plays Ronnie, a determined - if obsessive - mall cop who one day plans of becoming a Police Officer, enforce the law and conquer his love in the form of an Anna Faris.
It's written and directed by Jody Hill and what little humour there actually is is just the darkest you'll find anywhere. With maybe one big laugh at the end, it's not exactly hilarious. A good example of this and a big talking point whenever the film is brought up is the Rape/Not Rape scene - by now Anna Faris is out of it on shots and Ronnie's own medication while Ronnie has sex on top of her. Noticing that she's unconscious, Rogen stops. But Faris instantly comes up with a "Why are you stopping motherfuXXer?". It's a scene played for laughs, but you're not really sure if you should be laughing.
Faris, usually playing characters out of the depth and ditsy, is a welcome change as an unlikeable cheat and partier and is actually in one of her better roles, showing us how good a comic she actually is. It does say something though when your best character is being played by Anna Faris of "Scary Movie", "Yogi Bear" and "Movie 43" fame though...
Other supporting cast are considerably less fun: Ray Liotta does very little as a cop, while - still a good few years away from End Of Watch brilliance and still in his supporting comic character mold - Michael Pena puts on an irritating voice throughout (and don't even get me started on the always awful Aziz Ansari who's character's name is literally "Saddamn").
Even on release, Observe was up against it; pitting itself up against Paul Blart: Mall Cop. And the similarities of the two films are eerily similar. What both films do seem to miss though is the fact that literally no-one finds the subject of an overweight mall security guard interesting.
With very little to like and a supporting cast chiseling away at your patience, "Observe and Report" features minimal laughs and an unlikeable Seth Rogen. Observe and Report is not remotely a good film. At least the soundtrack's alright though... I suppose that's something.
- @JonnyJonJon1
You're Next
(2011)
Disappointingly, We're Next
1 September 2013
Warning: Spoilers
You're Next is the latest Home Invasion Horror to grace our screens. From the off, instantly, we are welcomed by boobs and blood. And I do mean that, "Welcomed", because it doesn't feel like a horror movie has hit our cinemas with as much gusto as You're Next in a while.
The story involves a family meeting for an overdue family gathering at your standard House In The Middle Of Nowhere, and after arguments at the dinner table our guests find that they happen to be trapped in the house by nutjobs in crude animal masks.
Characters are offed fairly quickly in spectacular enough ways, whilst other - better - horror films are lovingly referenced throughout: Evil Dead, Straw Dogs, Halloween, Texas Chainsaw, The Shining... I could go on, there were lots - even a Home Alone-style trap is in there!
It is just a shame that it really shows how weak the writing is for the "human" characters - as welcome as it is to not see horny teens in the central role of a horror, the dialogue for our family members really isn't much better than if they were. Empty replies like "OK" feel very standard and generic, which they obviously are supposed to be to show how normal and detached these people are, but all the same, before any arrows do eventually fly it really is quite a slow watch. And, like myself, you may actually find yourself wishing for these people to be killed off horrifically.
I'm afraid this isn't the only problem though. After a fairly excellent and confident First and Second Act (A kill involving a Nikon is a highlight), the Third really does lose its footing as the Baddies reveal their motive. In a film like this, you don't really need to give your antagonists one and simple blind violence is suitably reliable in a film like this, but instead they're given this bland, overused motive which really just feels sluggish and tacked on last minute.
Moving back to a positive, the soundtrack has to be mentioned. It sizzles without ever going over the top, and whilst managing to stay creepy and tense (a song stuck on constant repeat is both catchy and eerie), with the music in the last half hour accompanying murders and hide and seek with a brilliant synthesizer pumped Terminator-esque chase sequence.
With an interesting start and middle filled with straight up villains (I wouldn't be surprised if we end up seeing any Trick Or Treaters with masks like these ones this Halloween) and fantastic death sequences this is still one of the better horror movies in a good while, only being let down by a disappointing end.
The story involves a family meeting for an overdue family gathering at your standard House In The Middle Of Nowhere, and after arguments at the dinner table our guests find that they happen to be trapped in the house by nutjobs in crude animal masks.
Characters are offed fairly quickly in spectacular enough ways, whilst other - better - horror films are lovingly referenced throughout: Evil Dead, Straw Dogs, Halloween, Texas Chainsaw, The Shining... I could go on, there were lots - even a Home Alone-style trap is in there!
It is just a shame that it really shows how weak the writing is for the "human" characters - as welcome as it is to not see horny teens in the central role of a horror, the dialogue for our family members really isn't much better than if they were. Empty replies like "OK" feel very standard and generic, which they obviously are supposed to be to show how normal and detached these people are, but all the same, before any arrows do eventually fly it really is quite a slow watch. And, like myself, you may actually find yourself wishing for these people to be killed off horrifically.
I'm afraid this isn't the only problem though. After a fairly excellent and confident First and Second Act (A kill involving a Nikon is a highlight), the Third really does lose its footing as the Baddies reveal their motive. In a film like this, you don't really need to give your antagonists one and simple blind violence is suitably reliable in a film like this, but instead they're given this bland, overused motive which really just feels sluggish and tacked on last minute.
Moving back to a positive, the soundtrack has to be mentioned. It sizzles without ever going over the top, and whilst managing to stay creepy and tense (a song stuck on constant repeat is both catchy and eerie), with the music in the last half hour accompanying murders and hide and seek with a brilliant synthesizer pumped Terminator-esque chase sequence.
With an interesting start and middle filled with straight up villains (I wouldn't be surprised if we end up seeing any Trick Or Treaters with masks like these ones this Halloween) and fantastic death sequences this is still one of the better horror movies in a good while, only being let down by a disappointing end.
- @JonnyJonJon1
Kick-Ass 2
(2013)
Suck-Ass 2
15 August 2013
When the first Kick-Ass hit our cinemas we were astounded at both how brilliantly simple an idea it was and how it had never been done before. It waltzed in with this robust cocksure approach, that hadn't been done properly since at least the 90's. It moved with this swagger as it happily let little girls decapitate drug dealers whilst setting others on fire and it's a shame Kick-Ass was so good, because the sequel is then solely based on topping it. Like many others, Kick-Ass 2 does not manage that feat.
Kick-Ass 2 comes in years after the first and there have been many superhero movies in between: Some better than others. And Kick-Ass 2 doesn't really quite fit in to either category. What we loved about the first was how sure of itself it was, proud of its own violence and clever crudeness, and K-A 2 comes in, doing pretty much the same, just... again. And it feels a little tired. It's not unwelcome, it's just that it doesn't seem to have many new tricks up its sleeve that's all.
The story picks up with our titular hero Dave (Taylor-Johnson) has retired prematurely from the superhero business, whereas other self-made heroes have decided to step in. Our other hero Hit Girl (Moretz) is struggling to adjust to her life dealing with foster carer, Marcus (Morris Chestnut, underused again), as he doesn't agree with her going out and murdering people. At the same time, she must try and fit in with the girls at school, who she'll find are probably even more evil than any sociopath she's had to deal with as Hit Girl.
These characters are as fantastically reliable as ever; they're strong, layered characters who we know and like already from the first, without particularly changing. On the other hand, we have baddie Chris D'Amico (Mintz-Plasse) formally Red Mist, now the MotherfuXXer. Before, he was this needy, spoiled child, trying to live up to his father, whereas now he's just this over the top, poorly written bad guy. It's a shame, actually to see him so two dimensional. At the same time, things seem to happen just by accident in this movie. People die ridiculously, one death coming straight from one of the Final Destination movies. The reason for this one can only assume is the change of writer. The brilliant Jane Goldman out, which seems a preposterous move.
This review is sounding very negative though, and it's certainly not all bad. Hats off to the casting in this: Andy Nyman and Donald Faison (Faison plays a character who goes by the title "Doctor Gravity", a clever little wink which Scrubs fans should eat up) are both great choices as baddie and goodie respectively, which can only bring me to Jim Carrey. Jim Carrey is brilliant in this film, almost unrecognisable in his battle scars face makeup and heavy voice as Colonel Stars and Stripes. He acts as this sequels equivalent of the firsts Nicolas Cage. He probably doesn't leave quite the lasting impression as Cage's Big Daddy, but that's probably down to him simply not getting as much screen-time in this film. All the same, Colonel Stars and Stripes is full of great lines ("You've got a dog on your balls") and is still a very memorable character who I'm sure will be in popular culture for a good while.
While these are good, other superheroes are not. Yes, these characters are supposed to be makeshift, but some are just unneeded: A couple deciding to dress up like super heroes to raise awareness for their lost son are completely pointless, which can also be said for Dave's Other Friend and at least one of the people on the team of Bad Guy's too. This film is stuffed to breaking point full of super characters, and it reminds us of X-men: The Last Stand, as it throws unwanted people at you while not caring for some of the characters that actually deserve it - Too much screen time for some, not enough for others.
Overall, it's a fun film with a lot to like, but with lots of average characters, some of it being far too sloppy in places, there's lots to dislike too. But as the Colonel would say: "Try to have fun, otherwise what's the point?". Wise words.
Kick-Ass 2 comes in years after the first and there have been many superhero movies in between: Some better than others. And Kick-Ass 2 doesn't really quite fit in to either category. What we loved about the first was how sure of itself it was, proud of its own violence and clever crudeness, and K-A 2 comes in, doing pretty much the same, just... again. And it feels a little tired. It's not unwelcome, it's just that it doesn't seem to have many new tricks up its sleeve that's all.
The story picks up with our titular hero Dave (Taylor-Johnson) has retired prematurely from the superhero business, whereas other self-made heroes have decided to step in. Our other hero Hit Girl (Moretz) is struggling to adjust to her life dealing with foster carer, Marcus (Morris Chestnut, underused again), as he doesn't agree with her going out and murdering people. At the same time, she must try and fit in with the girls at school, who she'll find are probably even more evil than any sociopath she's had to deal with as Hit Girl.
These characters are as fantastically reliable as ever; they're strong, layered characters who we know and like already from the first, without particularly changing. On the other hand, we have baddie Chris D'Amico (Mintz-Plasse) formally Red Mist, now the MotherfuXXer. Before, he was this needy, spoiled child, trying to live up to his father, whereas now he's just this over the top, poorly written bad guy. It's a shame, actually to see him so two dimensional. At the same time, things seem to happen just by accident in this movie. People die ridiculously, one death coming straight from one of the Final Destination movies. The reason for this one can only assume is the change of writer. The brilliant Jane Goldman out, which seems a preposterous move.
This review is sounding very negative though, and it's certainly not all bad. Hats off to the casting in this: Andy Nyman and Donald Faison (Faison plays a character who goes by the title "Doctor Gravity", a clever little wink which Scrubs fans should eat up) are both great choices as baddie and goodie respectively, which can only bring me to Jim Carrey. Jim Carrey is brilliant in this film, almost unrecognisable in his battle scars face makeup and heavy voice as Colonel Stars and Stripes. He acts as this sequels equivalent of the firsts Nicolas Cage. He probably doesn't leave quite the lasting impression as Cage's Big Daddy, but that's probably down to him simply not getting as much screen-time in this film. All the same, Colonel Stars and Stripes is full of great lines ("You've got a dog on your balls") and is still a very memorable character who I'm sure will be in popular culture for a good while.
While these are good, other superheroes are not. Yes, these characters are supposed to be makeshift, but some are just unneeded: A couple deciding to dress up like super heroes to raise awareness for their lost son are completely pointless, which can also be said for Dave's Other Friend and at least one of the people on the team of Bad Guy's too. This film is stuffed to breaking point full of super characters, and it reminds us of X-men: The Last Stand, as it throws unwanted people at you while not caring for some of the characters that actually deserve it - Too much screen time for some, not enough for others.
Overall, it's a fun film with a lot to like, but with lots of average characters, some of it being far too sloppy in places, there's lots to dislike too. But as the Colonel would say: "Try to have fun, otherwise what's the point?". Wise words.
- @JonnyJonJon1
Pain & Gain
(2013)
Maim & Gain
7 August 2013
The great Arnold Schwarzenegger once (in)famously said how working out was as satisfying to him as "having sex with a woman and cumming". This quote could be what Michael Bay kept going back to whenever he was stuck for ideas on where the film should go next. That is no bad thing though.
Bay's had enough time to master his trashy bad-taste American film making - 2015 will be the anniversary of Bad Boys in in '95 so he's been doing for almost 20 years now, unbelievably. And you go in to Pain & Gain knowing this, and perhaps even hoping for it.
Mark Wahlberg plays Danny Lugo, a muscle-head who doesn't necessarily have a bad life, just wants more from it. He works at a gym as a personal trainer he eventually meets scumbag, Kershaw (Tony Shalhoub - weirdly likable as a total bastard) through which he believes he can swindle for his vast amounts of cash.
This leads to a few false starts: his partners are completely incompetent - Paul Doyle (Johnson), a recently released from prison Born Again Christian and frequent steroid abuser Adrien Doorbal (Mackie), are incapable of kidnapping Kershaw; raiding his home when his family are having dinner and getting the wrong license plate of his car. It comes to something when Wahlberg is the brains of the operation: For reassurance to Johnson to get him on board Wahlberg says "I've watched a lotta movies - I know what I'm doing!"
Rob Corddry, Rebel Wilson and Ed Harris as a retired detective all lend reliable cast, but the real winner of this piece is Johnson. No matter what movie he's in, he's had some form of confidence, he's known what he's doing. But here, he plays his role almost as if he's a 400 pound bodybuilding child. Making "friends" with the guy he's kidnapped, cooking up some severed hands out in public and sucking up cocaine like it was sherbet.
It's exactly this man-child theme that can strain though. Michael Bay seems to love his own crudeness, which he's displayed fairly recently too in Transformers 2 & 3 (robot testicles, anyone?): When kidnapping Shalhoub, Wahlburg and the team's hideout is a sex factory. In need of a something to cover his face, Johnson finds the closest thing to one he can and throws on a leather gimp mask. Which sounds funny, but seems far too out of place at times. Some jokes do hit though, and hit hard: Wahlburg, trying to make himself a part of his new, stolen, area hosts a neighbourhood watch involving Bar Paly, The Rock's new girlfriend, is particularly memorable.
Pain & Gain isn't brilliant, but is a nice collection to an already impressive enough haul from Bay. Think of it as a steroid hit - full of energy and power and great while it lasts, but too much will leave you incompetent and actually quite small where it counts.
Bay's had enough time to master his trashy bad-taste American film making - 2015 will be the anniversary of Bad Boys in in '95 so he's been doing for almost 20 years now, unbelievably. And you go in to Pain & Gain knowing this, and perhaps even hoping for it.
Mark Wahlberg plays Danny Lugo, a muscle-head who doesn't necessarily have a bad life, just wants more from it. He works at a gym as a personal trainer he eventually meets scumbag, Kershaw (Tony Shalhoub - weirdly likable as a total bastard) through which he believes he can swindle for his vast amounts of cash.
This leads to a few false starts: his partners are completely incompetent - Paul Doyle (Johnson), a recently released from prison Born Again Christian and frequent steroid abuser Adrien Doorbal (Mackie), are incapable of kidnapping Kershaw; raiding his home when his family are having dinner and getting the wrong license plate of his car. It comes to something when Wahlberg is the brains of the operation: For reassurance to Johnson to get him on board Wahlberg says "I've watched a lotta movies - I know what I'm doing!"
Rob Corddry, Rebel Wilson and Ed Harris as a retired detective all lend reliable cast, but the real winner of this piece is Johnson. No matter what movie he's in, he's had some form of confidence, he's known what he's doing. But here, he plays his role almost as if he's a 400 pound bodybuilding child. Making "friends" with the guy he's kidnapped, cooking up some severed hands out in public and sucking up cocaine like it was sherbet.
It's exactly this man-child theme that can strain though. Michael Bay seems to love his own crudeness, which he's displayed fairly recently too in Transformers 2 & 3 (robot testicles, anyone?): When kidnapping Shalhoub, Wahlburg and the team's hideout is a sex factory. In need of a something to cover his face, Johnson finds the closest thing to one he can and throws on a leather gimp mask. Which sounds funny, but seems far too out of place at times. Some jokes do hit though, and hit hard: Wahlburg, trying to make himself a part of his new, stolen, area hosts a neighbourhood watch involving Bar Paly, The Rock's new girlfriend, is particularly memorable.
Pain & Gain isn't brilliant, but is a nice collection to an already impressive enough haul from Bay. Think of it as a steroid hit - full of energy and power and great while it lasts, but too much will leave you incompetent and actually quite small where it counts.
- @JonnyJonJon1
Tell Your Friends