shaofutzer Reviews

Jiu zi tian mo (1984)

Just watch it...

[6/10 · 15 February 2005]

If you're into kung fu movies and aren't looking for something to take seriously then watch this movie. I'm not going to go into details because it is so much better to go in not knowing anything about it. I was completely stunned 3 minutes into it and the feeling never left. This is truly a bizarre film. Full of cheese-tastic special effects and some surprisingly good action, this film will not disappoint if played during a party or friendly get-together. Everyone I show it to reaches a state of near self-urination. It is truly a unique experience that has not grown old after all these years. The glam-rock heroes and flying bloodsucking plastic skulls that look like dollar store halloween decorations are pure joy. Please take my word for it and watch this movie if you can find it. Buy it if you have to. Seriously.

Hulk (2003)

Best comic to movie adaptation so far.

[7/10 · 4 February 2005]

If you're going to let people like "princessleia912" influence your decision to watch this movie, then you're going to miss out on the best comic to movie adaptation thus far. The aforementioned reviewer made the uneducated comment about PCR not being around in 1965 when it's obvious the movie never took place during 1965. If it was supposed to be 1965, then Bruce Banner (in the movie) would be pushing 42 when he first becomes the Hulk. I don't think so. It's more believable that he was in his twenties - which is plausible because the PCR machine was invented by Mullis in 1985 (which is twenty years later, not thirty - obviously math was not a prerequisite at the lab Miss Leia worked at). After re-watching the film I found absolutely no time reference. Anyway - don't you think a top secret government lab would have access to advanced technology before the public does? Besides - it was a movie! If you're going to nitpick - then you should hate almost every Hollywood movie ever. If you're going to down a movie because of its lack of biological accuracy - then shouldn't you feel equally miffed about all the people who get blown many feet backward when shot by hand-held firearms? That's physically impossible. So are the laws of physics to be overlooked? I think "princessleia912" needs to take elementary general science again. I really wish people would think before they posted comments about movies here.

Anyhow, you're reading this because you want to learn about the Hulk movie aren't you? Not to read the idiotic ranting of someone who thinks they know something (princessleia912). So I'll give you my take on the movie now.

I really enjoyed it. Sure it seemed to drag for just a minute, but the movie more than made up for it with the ton of action it delivered at the end. Although there was 45 minutes of character development to contend with - the last hour or so is pure action-packed Hulk-smash goodness. "Depicting the military as evil" was pretty much the theme in the original Incredible Hulk TV series - so to bring up that point is just wrong. If you liked the original show, then this movie will blow you away. If you're a fan of the comic book, you'll love this adaptation. With so many crap translations such as Daredevil and Spiderman, this movie truly surprised me by being extremely faithful to the look and feel of the comic. The CG was awesome and as good or better than anything I've ever seen in a movie - and I'm extremely picky when it comes to CG use. If you're going to talk badly about the CG in this film - then you surely must hate the CG in films such as the Lord of the Rings trilogy, which in my opinion was not an ounce better than this film. ILM handled the eye-candy marvelously. To whoever said The Hulk didn't look like Eric Bana - what movie were you watching? You obviously downloaded the pre-production screener off the internet or something. They couldn't have made him look anymore like the actor who played Bruce Banner without pasting his face to the Hulk's body. This movie was expertly directed right down to the excellent transition effects that take place between nearly every major scene in the movie, giving the whole thing a very comic book feel - much more so than ANY movie ever made.

I don't want to spoil anything for you or set your expectations too high, as obviously some people are stricken with bandwagonosis. So I'm just going to let you decide - but do yourself a favor and don't let some of these movie thieves, nitpickers, Hulk-haters, and wannabe-scientists impair your judgment of this excellent film. I give this movie a 10/10 for eye candy, and an 8/10 overall.

The Corruptor (1999)

Seriously Underrated Slice of Action

[8/10 · 26 January 2005]

While not perfect, The Corrupter is far from lacking when it comes to delivering the action goods we've come to expect from a Chow Yun Fat movie. People who say it needs more action or character development must have watched the wrong movie. To add more of either would have had to resulted in a longer movie. From start to finish, no time is wasted in conveying the story or showing Hong Kong style gunplay that is above and beyond what American audiences are used to. Extremely violent and full of imaginative ways to kill people with a gun, I don't see how anyone who would even consider watching this would give it a low rating. Unlike today's action flicks who strive for their precious PG-13 rating, this movie takes it over the top and is full of gratuitous nudity, immoral activity, and point-blank head-exploding gunfire. If you're into any of the aforementioned goodness, then you more than likely won't be disappointed by this flick. The famous car chase scene is perhaps the most violent ever put to celluloid. Mark Wahlberg isn't the greatest actor but is believable nonetheless. Chow Yun Fat plays the role of desensitized Asian gang taskforce detective Nick Chen perfectly. This isn't a movie to watch with the kids as Chen's antics can sometimes leave one questioning his sanity. With a touching ending and adrenaline pumping action, The Corrupter delivers on all promises - so much so that I must wonder if some of the other reviewers here were even watching the same movie. 9/10

Shaun of the Dead (2004)

Much better than expected - in a word - Wonderful.

[10/10 · 16 January 2005]

Ahhhh the rare and oft misunderstood zombie-comedy genre at it's absolute best. I went into this movie hoping it would be awesome but expecting it to be drivel (not familiar with the sitcom Spaced at the time) but left with a feeling a movie has not given me since... Heck I don't even remember a movie making me feel quite like this. This is what a good movie is all about. It contains everything it needs and very little it doesn't (I.E. - "You've got red on your shirt" - was a little overused and not that funny). While understandably the occasional scene of dismemberment and foul mouthed cursing may turn away many comedy fans, this movie was not intended for those people. This movie was intended for people who could appreciate the humor in films such as Evil Dead 2 or Dead Alive. What this movie does is escalate every good aspect of those aforementioned movies to a new degree that I feel will be difficult to surpass, launching it right up there with Monty Python and the Holy Grail as on of the best British comedic movies ever created - and quite possibly one of the best comic movies ever made regardless of nationality. While having a deep understanding of British culture helps, anyone with an IQ of over 100 should find this movie extremely entertaining. I nearly wet myself from laughing so hard throughout the movie although it does sort of drag near the end as everyone dies off, but it is miraculously saved by a heart-warming and very funny ending that couldn't have been done any better. It's upsetting that the movie didn't gross more in the states, although I'm sure once word of mouth gets around, DVD sales and rentals will pick up. I'm an extremely critical movie buff and this movie has permanently carved a notch in my top ten films of all time. If you're at all skeptical - don't be. If you're 13-60 (a very cool 60) you'll find something that will appeal to you in this movie, although I suspect its biggest fan base will be men in their 20's to early 30's. I cannot stress the importance of this film as it is now the king of all horror/comedy films. Even if the horror aspect doesn't appeal to you, the comedy is solid and if you don't find yourself laughing at least a few times throughout, then I seriously doubt you're even human. I give this the highest recommendation possible. It's a story about friendship, love, senseless violence, and gut-busting scenes of pure joy. Watch it and you'll know what mean.

King Arthur (2004)

Ack, what happened here?

[3/10 · 16 January 2005]

As many other reviewers have pointed out, this movie attempts to forgo the fantasy aspect to portray a more realistic Arthurian legend. If you believe Lancelot was a Spaniard that wore a black leather basket-weave blouse, that King Arthur was a boring and uncharismatic Roman lackey, and that Merlin was a mud encrusted Celtic hillbilly, then this movie won't bother you one bit. If you were hoping to see any of the relevant quests of the Knights of the Round or even the knights themselves (besides the aforementioned very "Artist formerly known as Prince"-like Lancelot) you will be sorely disappointed. Whoever wrote this story obviously had little knowledge or love of Arthurian legend and after watching this movie I longed for the days when director Antoine Fuqua was merely a music video director (as he should have stayed). Whoever did the casting for this movie must have come into work drugged, drunk, and tired because everyone, save for Keira Knightly was horribly miscast. While Clive Owen has a place in Hollywood, it's certainly not as a leading man, and he proves it with the dullest, most lackluster performance of King Arthur ever portrayed on the big screen. I've seen high school drama flunkies that could do a more convincing Arthur. I wouldn't have followed this man to a Kwik-E-Mart, much less into battle. He was really much better off playing a driver in BMW-sponsored short films where his dialogue was limited to mostly one-liners. The acting was laughable and the movie in itself was utterly forgettable. I had gone into this movie with an open mind - realizing that such a legend could only be butchered by Hollywood - but so little did I realize how badly one could butcher it. I'm not going to complain about how far off this movie is from Excalibur (which is by far a superior movie BTW) because I realize they were trying to make it as believable as possible. I'm complaining because it failed to rouse even the slightest bit of interest out of me. I was bored to tears and when the movie was finally over I could only breathe a sigh of relief, forgetting momentarily the anger I initially felt of being ripped off by paying to go watch it. The ridiculous costumes and even more ridiculous dialogue paved the way for the most ridiculous rendition of the Arthur legends possibly ever made. Fuqua seemed to steal scenes from everything from The Last of the Mohicans to Gladiator, while never even approaching a sense of excitement or even entertainment. Surely someone must have spoken up during filming about the horrid costume Lancelot was wearing. He looked like Prince during his Purple Rain era - hardly the knight in shining armor I've been accustomed to envision. In fact, these "knights" were barely armored at all. Who would go into battle with a blouse on? Anyway, if you're really, REALLY bored, a 13 year old girl, and absolutely must have your sword-swinging, period drama fix - then give this movie a shot. Otherwise - steer clear. No - run away. Run far, far away. I'm confused - and you will be too if you try to watch this. Two thumbs down.

The Chronicles of Riddick (2004)

Not as bad as you'd be led to believe...

[6/10 · 8 January 2005]

It almost seems as though it's become fashionable to down this movie as of late. I'm no paid critic, but I am a huge cinema buff, sci-fi fan, and educated person and the only thing that bothered me about this movie was the ridiculous nomenclature used throughout the movie(If you though Richard Riddick was bad, then think about Necromongers, Aereon the air elemental, Crematoria - a place where the sunrise will burn you to a crisp, Furia, Lord Marshal, a girl named Jack, the Underverse... you get the picture). But this reason alone is not enough to damn the movie as so many before me have seemed so willing to do (and quite vocally I must say). Is it media brainwashing, jealously of Vin Diesel by the husbands/boyfriends of giddy female fans, or are people just tired of watching one awesome action scene after another filmed on very cool sets replete with equally awesome special effects? I'm no huge Vin Diesel fan, but he's perfect in the role of Riddick and plays this happy-go-lucky seemingly indestructible dark hero character to the tee. People will down his acting ability, but what they don't realize is that his deadpan voice and seemingly emotionless face is essential to the character. If you want proof Vin can act, watch the short film Multi-Facial - in which he wrote, produced, directed and starred in. This guy can act folks - don't confuse his character in this movie or others he's been cast in with lack of talent. Spielsberg cast him in Saving Private Ryan for a reason (after watching the aforementioned short film). The action sequences are top-notch and I promise any true fan of science fiction and/or action will find this movie a fantastic joyride for the senses. What it lacks in cerebral stimulation, it makes up for with fantastic backdrops, genuinely witty one-liners, amazing special effects, and more action than you would normally cram into 10 Hollywood big-budget "action" movies. I don't want to spoil the movie for you - just believe me when I tell you, anyone who doesn't like this movie should be watching The Piano or Fried Green Tomatoes, because you've lost touch with what Hollywood was founded on - the spectacle. If you have the capacity to overlook the cheesy naming schemes used throughout, you will be richly rewarded with one of the most visually stunning movies ever created. Don't let Vin Diesel's previous performances in movies such as xXx or The Fast and the Furious affect your judgement - I didn't care for those movies either. Don't let the legions of aging movie critics with a vendetta against all muscle-bound actors affect your decision to watch this film. It is a sci-fi tour de force and I'm willing to put my reputation on the line by recommending it to everyone I come across, which is extremely rare indeed - and no, I'm not some giddy teenage girl or bored housewife. I'm a heterosexual 28 year old man that grew up loving horror movies, Star Wars, Transformers, and G.I. Joe (well, Cobra at least). If you have any similar background you too will love this movie just as all of my friends and I have - IF, like I mentioned earlier in this review, you can get over the silly names. All in all, while not perfect I must give this movie 9/10 points with the 1 point being deducted for (obviously) my only complaint. David and Vin, if you're reading this - please follow up with C3 and make your target audience happy - just leave the naming process to someone else. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED.

xXx (2002)

Completely unbelievable but entertaining nonetheless...

[5/10 · 7 January 2005]

If you're expecting an intelligent action movie, go elsewhere. If you don't mind the cheesy "EXTREME" generation of products and advertising that has assaulted us in the past few years and like watching things blow up then this is watchable. I never found myself wanting to turn it off although a lot of the scenes had me feeling truly embarrassed for Vin, who plays a much better Riddick than Xander Cage (I mean, come on, the lead character's name should give you a clue as to what kind of movie this is). Extremely clichéd, predictable, and obviously aimed at 13 year old boys, I still found myself watching it until the end which is more than I can say about some movies. The action sequences were great, Asia Argento was hot as usual, and there were occasional moments of coolness, but for the most part this movie falls flat on its face due to the contrived plot line, young target audience, and lack of violence that should be at least somewhat prevalent in an action movie with this kind of plot. I think 2 people were shot with actual bullets in this movie, the rest were tranquilized or gassed silently (no coughing up blood or intense scenes here folks). Then again, if you want to watch an action flick with your kids then I suppose this is the one.