I saw an interview with Awkwafina after the Oceans 9 movie and thought she seemed like a genuine and gracious. Recently I happened to catch her show about life and living in Forest Hills and New York City. It took me a little time to understand that Nora wants to be confident street tough but is really a softie underneath all that bark, always one step behind life and trying to crawl her way out of the messes she creates for herself. Unlike many sitcoms, there is no mean spirited humor. Perhaps I like the show more because I think Nora as a person is so very likeable and worked hard and deserves her success. But she is very funny, even in all her interviews.
Reviews
67 Reviews
Avengement
(I) (2019)
Much better than expected. Adkins is superb
1 October 2019
No huge surprises here but Adkins is fantastic and holds this film together. In essence, this oddly named movie is about our protagonist, who is a mostly a straight shooter who makes a mistake when he is young which, through misfortune of the events, results in him ending up in prison. And while he's there and needing to survive, he learns a great deal about how much his predicament which he blames himself is not nearly all his fault... and he is determined to discover the remaining facts and dispense justice as he sees fit.
What makes this unusual is that Adkins is extremely effective as the unhinged anti-hero in this film. It's clear that if he had better people around him he would be in A and B grade films instead of what this would have been - but Adkins not only saves it, he makes it a fun watch and potentially rewatchable. If you're going to have a guilty pleasure besides the Boyka Undisputed franchise, this is the one (and I like this better.) Well worth the gamble to look.
What makes this unusual is that Adkins is extremely effective as the unhinged anti-hero in this film. It's clear that if he had better people around him he would be in A and B grade films instead of what this would have been - but Adkins not only saves it, he makes it a fun watch and potentially rewatchable. If you're going to have a guilty pleasure besides the Boyka Undisputed franchise, this is the one (and I like this better.) Well worth the gamble to look.
The Guilty
(2018)
Ambitious, gripping film that has its flaws
18 November 2018
If you can't enjoy a good drama and need the screen to show more than one room / scene - then this film is not for you nor are one room plays. You're going to have to enjoy the telling of an interesting, tense story.
Our main actor is very good in his role as an emergency operator who cares too much about those in need (at times, lol) and goes beyond the scope of duty - both for good and where he needs to know he must respect the boundaries for good reason. He is also very depressed about a number of things in his life that aren't going well and sometimes it shows - but the stress (and sometimes disdain) seems to show its wear on others.
For much of this film, it's excellent although at times it suffers from escapes from what reality should seem to be. Without ruining the film, I can say that I doubt that emergency operators always need to handle calls alone and put people on hold because no one else can help assist with a case concurrently.
There are parts to this story - it's twists - which are uneven and I am not totally convinced were good choices and creates some plot holes. But the acting is all terrific, mostly voice acting by people on the phone with our main actor. But it's all well paced, timing is good and feels credible just about all of the time.
Our main actor is very good in his role as an emergency operator who cares too much about those in need (at times, lol) and goes beyond the scope of duty - both for good and where he needs to know he must respect the boundaries for good reason. He is also very depressed about a number of things in his life that aren't going well and sometimes it shows - but the stress (and sometimes disdain) seems to show its wear on others.
For much of this film, it's excellent although at times it suffers from escapes from what reality should seem to be. Without ruining the film, I can say that I doubt that emergency operators always need to handle calls alone and put people on hold because no one else can help assist with a case concurrently.
There are parts to this story - it's twists - which are uneven and I am not totally convinced were good choices and creates some plot holes. But the acting is all terrific, mostly voice acting by people on the phone with our main actor. But it's all well paced, timing is good and feels credible just about all of the time.
The Great Wall
(I) (2016)
Awkward, embarrassingly cheesy, laughably bad script
28 May 2017
Wow. The dialogue in this legend is wooden, stilted and as dense as the Great Wall. I'm not sure whether Damon has been losing his interest in acting, with his appearing pretty bored and going through the motions in Jason Bourne. Here with a terrible script and with each actor sounding like they are reading off of a script, Damon appears even more stilted and awkward. And you know things are off to a bad start when Damon delivers an impossible series of arrow shots to the delight of the crowd and total disbelief of the audience watching this travesty.
Many have complained that the white man coming to save the Chinese was a horrible whitewashing of this movie. To the contrary. It's so ludicrous that it doesn't matter who plays Damon. Supposedly an orphan, given to an army of mercenaries at 8, he learns to fight by starting with cleaning the bathrooms and then rising in the ranks. Him and his men are off in search of the black powder that turns into fire (gunpowder) but gets caught in China by an army trying to fight an army of overgrown lizards.
Even Willem Defoe can't save this laughable farce. He's as awkwardly placed in this film just like everyone else and his lines are just as stilted. And when you hear the actors delivering lines, you'll notice that they pull up short often because another character is supposed to interrupt them to say something naturally. Except you'll notice them giving each other space as what happens when people read from a script and the timing isn't perfect so as to sound natural.
Don't say you weren't warned. It's an awkward fun farce if you can turn off your brain and just pretend like it's Jurassic Park in medieval times and white super soldier has come to save the day with his legendary set of skills. And the fact that the general leading the Chinese army is a hot looking female.... well.... prepare the usual cliché of "we are not alike at all... but we are alike... and we'll obviously put aside our differences because this film is so darn predictable."
Let the farce begin.
Many have complained that the white man coming to save the Chinese was a horrible whitewashing of this movie. To the contrary. It's so ludicrous that it doesn't matter who plays Damon. Supposedly an orphan, given to an army of mercenaries at 8, he learns to fight by starting with cleaning the bathrooms and then rising in the ranks. Him and his men are off in search of the black powder that turns into fire (gunpowder) but gets caught in China by an army trying to fight an army of overgrown lizards.
Even Willem Defoe can't save this laughable farce. He's as awkwardly placed in this film just like everyone else and his lines are just as stilted. And when you hear the actors delivering lines, you'll notice that they pull up short often because another character is supposed to interrupt them to say something naturally. Except you'll notice them giving each other space as what happens when people read from a script and the timing isn't perfect so as to sound natural.
Don't say you weren't warned. It's an awkward fun farce if you can turn off your brain and just pretend like it's Jurassic Park in medieval times and white super soldier has come to save the day with his legendary set of skills. And the fact that the general leading the Chinese army is a hot looking female.... well.... prepare the usual cliché of "we are not alike at all... but we are alike... and we'll obviously put aside our differences because this film is so darn predictable."
Let the farce begin.
K-19: The Widowmaker
(2002)
Mediocre film, a sub story done Hollywood style
6 May 2017
I wanted to like this film. Sadly it got off to a bad start when all the actors decided to play fast and loose or not at all with their Russian accent. It was as if they tried to do something at the beginning and then said "aw... screw it. we aren't fooling anyone" and then dropped the accent entirely most of the time. You can put it behind you eventually but it's a sign about how sloppy this film is made.
The premise is that Ford's character is a bit of a bully who will take out of proportion risks and endanger the lives of everyone on board to prove his point. I did not see any resolution between Ford and Neeson's character. And in terms of what plays out that I won't say - I never saw it coming. And that's only because where the film went was not what the prior time led you to believe. In fact, everything pointed in the other direction until it felt like Hollywood stepped in because the script said "insert turning point here" and then the characters had to pretend as if this was the natural next sequence of events. It wasn't.
The special effects are fine and the submarine shots reasonably good. But the repair involved was also ridiculous. It was as almost as if they ran out of budget and would show you the same thing, with everyone having a go at what they were fixing which seemed more like "designated piece of metal". OK, we'll get beyond that but it still bears notice as you watch repeated scenes of the same thing as if to convey a sense of emotional impact on certain characters - which I didn't find credible.
This is nowhere near Das Boot to feel the tension. And it's not really meant to be. And as a "based on a true story" it's very, very lightly based on the true story. Most of the acting is fine but the script is a real problem. And I don't think Harrison Ford would have himself cast as anything else but smelling like roses. And that's also disappointing. At no point do I think the conclusion of this film is even remotely foreseeable because the natural flow of the characters and events simply doesn't get you there. It's done solely to keep the audience guessing what happens next and the very artificial Hollywood studios twist makes for a mediocre, phony feeling film that certainly would only stand up for one viewing, at best.
The premise is that Ford's character is a bit of a bully who will take out of proportion risks and endanger the lives of everyone on board to prove his point. I did not see any resolution between Ford and Neeson's character. And in terms of what plays out that I won't say - I never saw it coming. And that's only because where the film went was not what the prior time led you to believe. In fact, everything pointed in the other direction until it felt like Hollywood stepped in because the script said "insert turning point here" and then the characters had to pretend as if this was the natural next sequence of events. It wasn't.
The special effects are fine and the submarine shots reasonably good. But the repair involved was also ridiculous. It was as almost as if they ran out of budget and would show you the same thing, with everyone having a go at what they were fixing which seemed more like "designated piece of metal". OK, we'll get beyond that but it still bears notice as you watch repeated scenes of the same thing as if to convey a sense of emotional impact on certain characters - which I didn't find credible.
This is nowhere near Das Boot to feel the tension. And it's not really meant to be. And as a "based on a true story" it's very, very lightly based on the true story. Most of the acting is fine but the script is a real problem. And I don't think Harrison Ford would have himself cast as anything else but smelling like roses. And that's also disappointing. At no point do I think the conclusion of this film is even remotely foreseeable because the natural flow of the characters and events simply doesn't get you there. It's done solely to keep the audience guessing what happens next and the very artificial Hollywood studios twist makes for a mediocre, phony feeling film that certainly would only stand up for one viewing, at best.
Split
(IX) (2016)
Not surprised the studio reviews come up first
31 March 2017
So the first reviews here were which rated the film are obviously those connected with the film. The torrent of bad reviews that follows are the honest ones. From the start I had a bad feeling about this movie because the intro was so awkward and the dialogue was so cheesy with poor acting.
James Macavoy is a very talented and versatile actor. How he was suckered into doing the latest Shyalaman stinker can only be explained by his needing to pay back a favor or someone having a terrible video of James with a farm animal. This film is that bad. The only moments that are somewhat tolerable are when Macavoy is on the screen. He's got by far the most presence and talent and the rest of the cast looks even worse contrasting his performance with theirs.
In short, Macavoy plays a mentally ill person with multiple personalities. He kidnaps 2 girls with the assistance of a third who is terrified to act against his wishes, even when she has the ability to just walk away in a public airport. I mentioned this because that is how the film opens. You must buy into the premise in order for the film to even start to work.
As the film progresses, it becomes evident early on that Macavoy suffers from this multiple personality disorder and will act out each part. And Shyalaman throws in his usual bit of supernatural rubbish, how such afflictions are also gifts, the savant mentality. OK, great, got it. Begin an hour of torture porn and hints of what bad things might happen. Warning that things will get worse. Heighten tension. Disclose things that don't really add up. Heighten tension. Add more awkward, obviously orchestrated dialogue and directing.
Will the girls escape the potentially horrible ending they fear might happen? When will the James Macavoy acting clinic open? Will his accent change? Take Macavoy out of the film and this is a direct to video stinker that no one will remember. Sets a whole new bar of low.
James Macavoy is a very talented and versatile actor. How he was suckered into doing the latest Shyalaman stinker can only be explained by his needing to pay back a favor or someone having a terrible video of James with a farm animal. This film is that bad. The only moments that are somewhat tolerable are when Macavoy is on the screen. He's got by far the most presence and talent and the rest of the cast looks even worse contrasting his performance with theirs.
In short, Macavoy plays a mentally ill person with multiple personalities. He kidnaps 2 girls with the assistance of a third who is terrified to act against his wishes, even when she has the ability to just walk away in a public airport. I mentioned this because that is how the film opens. You must buy into the premise in order for the film to even start to work.
As the film progresses, it becomes evident early on that Macavoy suffers from this multiple personality disorder and will act out each part. And Shyalaman throws in his usual bit of supernatural rubbish, how such afflictions are also gifts, the savant mentality. OK, great, got it. Begin an hour of torture porn and hints of what bad things might happen. Warning that things will get worse. Heighten tension. Disclose things that don't really add up. Heighten tension. Add more awkward, obviously orchestrated dialogue and directing.
Will the girls escape the potentially horrible ending they fear might happen? When will the James Macavoy acting clinic open? Will his accent change? Take Macavoy out of the film and this is a direct to video stinker that no one will remember. Sets a whole new bar of low.
Logan
(2017)
#51 of all time? ROFLMAO
14 March 2017
The IMDb has become the desert wasteland of the movie studios who flood voting and the haven of our youngest millennials who live to vote for tripe like this, rarely having experienced a good movie or watching anything more than 5-10 years old.
This is a very mediocre and predictable X-Men movie dragged out for about 20 minutes too long. The script is weak and unfortunately dumbed down and needlessly mindlessly violent. Without ruining the film... you're going to ask yourself why the young girl doesn't talk. Cheap, exploitative tricks like this and a really rushed, dumb ending (because we need the same Kodak moment in every film) make this a pretty boring, droll drag of a film that is camouflaged in a deeper "so this is what happens when X-Men get old!" There was nothing deep about it.
The lazy script leaves open gaping holes but I won't repeat them as a spoiler. Just be prepared to realize that this is a much lesser film than is being lauded here. People feel they must praise Jackman's departure as well as Stewart. If it wasn't for their excellent acting, this film would have gone quickly to cable.
Notable are excellent special effects. I give them credit for seamless visuals. But the violence in this film was gratuitous and stupid, running into the face of danger like Superman. And at the end, after hearing all of this "we perfected it" rubbish, you'll have to wonder why the movie resembles Highlander. There can only be one. Really? Why is that?
Don't kid yourself. This is a watchable film but nothing you'll care to see again. Farewell X-men, you cashed in one last time.
This is a very mediocre and predictable X-Men movie dragged out for about 20 minutes too long. The script is weak and unfortunately dumbed down and needlessly mindlessly violent. Without ruining the film... you're going to ask yourself why the young girl doesn't talk. Cheap, exploitative tricks like this and a really rushed, dumb ending (because we need the same Kodak moment in every film) make this a pretty boring, droll drag of a film that is camouflaged in a deeper "so this is what happens when X-Men get old!" There was nothing deep about it.
The lazy script leaves open gaping holes but I won't repeat them as a spoiler. Just be prepared to realize that this is a much lesser film than is being lauded here. People feel they must praise Jackman's departure as well as Stewart. If it wasn't for their excellent acting, this film would have gone quickly to cable.
Notable are excellent special effects. I give them credit for seamless visuals. But the violence in this film was gratuitous and stupid, running into the face of danger like Superman. And at the end, after hearing all of this "we perfected it" rubbish, you'll have to wonder why the movie resembles Highlander. There can only be one. Really? Why is that?
Don't kid yourself. This is a watchable film but nothing you'll care to see again. Farewell X-men, you cashed in one last time.
Triple 9
(2016)
Someone here clearly hates religious Jews, not fond of Hispanics either
24 January 2017
For reasons unexplained, there was a decision to create some bizarre, totally out of place, religious Jewish Russian mafia. Having worked with some of them during my day job, the depiction of these Jewish villains was so pitiful bad that it immediately removed me from the movie. It could have been decent if pains weren't made to create such an artificial and unbelievable gang, complete with Yarmulkas. And then there is the denigration of blacks by these Jews and more I won't describe.
Great cast. Strange story that is not believable, straight from the opening. A film has to be plausible in order to be accepted by the audience. But how would anyone believe the opening scene and the repercussions of greed which didn't translate into an immediate problem? This film doesn't even bother with making sure that those covering up a crime *wear gloves* when committing crimes in places they shouldn't be.
The depiction of Hispanic people in Atlanta was also hilariously way over the top. Religious Jews are disgusting, disgraceful, racist people and Hispanics are all a bunch of ego driven mindless dumb thugs.
Whomever was responsible for this mess and clearly anti-Semitic priority should have been tarred and feathered for wasting a good cast of actors. They should have paid more attention to tightening up a very loose script instead of creating even more outrageous stereotypes.
Great cast. Strange story that is not believable, straight from the opening. A film has to be plausible in order to be accepted by the audience. But how would anyone believe the opening scene and the repercussions of greed which didn't translate into an immediate problem? This film doesn't even bother with making sure that those covering up a crime *wear gloves* when committing crimes in places they shouldn't be.
The depiction of Hispanic people in Atlanta was also hilariously way over the top. Religious Jews are disgusting, disgraceful, racist people and Hispanics are all a bunch of ego driven mindless dumb thugs.
Whomever was responsible for this mess and clearly anti-Semitic priority should have been tarred and feathered for wasting a good cast of actors. They should have paid more attention to tightening up a very loose script instead of creating even more outrageous stereotypes.
Layer Cake
(2004)
The best film few have seen
12 January 2017
You've heard of Snatch. Lock Stock. Rocknrolla. The rest of the British Gangsta series. This is one of the best of the lot and the cast is incredible. It's most of the big name stars before they were really big names. And this film lets you know why they made it.
Roger Craig is our unnamed protagonist who has some type of moral code even though he's a cocaine dealer. He's just about on his way out when his handler decides that he's got two very tough tasks for him right before our hero retires. And what a mess it turns out to be.
The dialogue is swift, crisp and witty. Even a very young Tom Hardy can be seen in this film. And Craig is extremely likable and charismatic. He's got that flair that made him Bond but without the extra need for dramatics and pretense.
I loved this film. Great soundtrack, interesting characters, a story that moves and whose plot isn't too contrived that it can't be followed. It's a story about the layers that comprise the business, from the top all the way down. And the cake is tasty. Enjoy.
Roger Craig is our unnamed protagonist who has some type of moral code even though he's a cocaine dealer. He's just about on his way out when his handler decides that he's got two very tough tasks for him right before our hero retires. And what a mess it turns out to be.
The dialogue is swift, crisp and witty. Even a very young Tom Hardy can be seen in this film. And Craig is extremely likable and charismatic. He's got that flair that made him Bond but without the extra need for dramatics and pretense.
I loved this film. Great soundtrack, interesting characters, a story that moves and whose plot isn't too contrived that it can't be followed. It's a story about the layers that comprise the business, from the top all the way down. And the cake is tasty. Enjoy.
Jack Reacher: Never Go Back
(2016)
Shouldn't have gone there in the first place
1 January 2017
There was no reason to ruin a good character in pulp fiction. Anyone can come up with a Tom Cruise ego trip story, where he is a super bad ass who can beat up a dozen people in a single fight with ease. Same regurgitated overconfident nonsense that sounds like something coming from your executive guru. In 15 seconds that pay phone is going to ring and I'm going to have all your butts kicked.
For reasons unexplained, Cruise is after the sexy military lady he's never actually met. And since he has nothing else to do in his sorry excuse for a life which he somehow survives on with pocket change, he's decided to come back to save her from some unknown sinister plot. Throw in some ridiculous subplot that will change his life forever, although he doesn't seem to have paid much attention. Only good enough to have the subject of his attention somehow use the same tricks and same lines on him as he uses on others. Wow, is this some much too clever way of saying "you two must be related?" Or is it a red herring? This film is too clichéd and full of stupid lines that try so hard to be clever.
I had a difficult time making it through the first third of the film since, as usual, it's just way too easy for a bad ass like this Reacher guy who "they ran out of medals" to award him for his awesomeness. It's a Cruise ego trip with a paint by number story where the good guys make all the things that would seem so very hard seem so simple and where security you'd expect to encounter just happens to be conveniently missing. They should never have tried to do these novels in the first place. A straight to cable quality B movie. Don't spend money on this one.
For reasons unexplained, Cruise is after the sexy military lady he's never actually met. And since he has nothing else to do in his sorry excuse for a life which he somehow survives on with pocket change, he's decided to come back to save her from some unknown sinister plot. Throw in some ridiculous subplot that will change his life forever, although he doesn't seem to have paid much attention. Only good enough to have the subject of his attention somehow use the same tricks and same lines on him as he uses on others. Wow, is this some much too clever way of saying "you two must be related?" Or is it a red herring? This film is too clichéd and full of stupid lines that try so hard to be clever.
I had a difficult time making it through the first third of the film since, as usual, it's just way too easy for a bad ass like this Reacher guy who "they ran out of medals" to award him for his awesomeness. It's a Cruise ego trip with a paint by number story where the good guys make all the things that would seem so very hard seem so simple and where security you'd expect to encounter just happens to be conveniently missing. They should never have tried to do these novels in the first place. A straight to cable quality B movie. Don't spend money on this one.
10 Cloverfield Lane
(2016)
Suspenseful but amateurish, illogical and pointless
19 December 2016
This seems like a love it or hate it film because of the reveal and ending, which I won't give away. The entire premise of the movie can be summed up in one sentence. Is the strange man who saves the wounded lady an insane psychopath or is he really the brilliant savant who has saved the lady from an unspeakable disaster?
Unfortunately to me this film felt like it was designed to prolong answering that question for 100 minutes. I was never into Lost or any other of JJ Abrams TV programs but now I understand his forte. It is in telling stories designed to go on interminably with endless reveals. The problem with this one is that the reveals were sometimes illogical, unnatural and forced. There was a noticeable stilted, awkward manner in which each subplot progresses.
One example is a scene with keys. Normally a person who realizes there is a difficult situation abound would wait for an opportune moment that would not invite suspicion. But here a seemingly inopportune time is presented as an opportunity. It's as if Abrams said "we need a scene with suspense here to prolong the film" and it succeeds in doing only that.
From my perspective, this film is just an overly long, pointless tease which is apparently Ambrams' trademark. Goodman plays his part as well as can be expected and there are some amusing moments. The actors do what they can with their roles but it's clear they are following a script, sometimes feeling as though this could have been a stage play. While I've seen worse, this has zero replayability factor because it's a one trick pony and all you want to know is where is this story really going. And like many others, I felt that it really wasn't worth the time investment. If you feel that the film is unrealistic and artificial early on, chances are you'll feel the same way throughout.
Unfortunately to me this film felt like it was designed to prolong answering that question for 100 minutes. I was never into Lost or any other of JJ Abrams TV programs but now I understand his forte. It is in telling stories designed to go on interminably with endless reveals. The problem with this one is that the reveals were sometimes illogical, unnatural and forced. There was a noticeable stilted, awkward manner in which each subplot progresses.
One example is a scene with keys. Normally a person who realizes there is a difficult situation abound would wait for an opportune moment that would not invite suspicion. But here a seemingly inopportune time is presented as an opportunity. It's as if Abrams said "we need a scene with suspense here to prolong the film" and it succeeds in doing only that.
From my perspective, this film is just an overly long, pointless tease which is apparently Ambrams' trademark. Goodman plays his part as well as can be expected and there are some amusing moments. The actors do what they can with their roles but it's clear they are following a script, sometimes feeling as though this could have been a stage play. While I've seen worse, this has zero replayability factor because it's a one trick pony and all you want to know is where is this story really going. And like many others, I felt that it really wasn't worth the time investment. If you feel that the film is unrealistic and artificial early on, chances are you'll feel the same way throughout.
The Accountant
(2016)
Predictable, totally unconvincing and laughable ending
29 October 2016
A 7.8 rating? Wow... what a laugh. Ben Affleck is totally unconvincing as Super Autistic Man. Mild mannered, stilted but genius accountant by day, accountant to the drug lords of the world by night, and super secret agent Rambo capable of defeating armies all by himself as a result of his awesome training and hidden capabilities.
If you can put aside the incredible awkwardness that is Affleck's attempt to be an autistic man, you'll get through most of this film. What's difficult is to believe for one second that Affleck is autistic. Compare his preposterous awkwardness designed just to be Mr. Socially Awkward with Dustin Hoffman in Rain Man and you'll be laughing hysterically.
It features a slow moving beginning, something about how the government is trying to figure out who this mysterious math genius for the underworld is. For some reason his photo is never captured. That's because autistic people can somehow avoid the camera lens. There is some absurd reveal that comes later in how this story comes together. Several people were laughing in the theater when it came out.
Without giving away the premise of the movie, set yourself up for a laughable and predictable ending that sounds something like a monetary appeal for the Foundation to Help Autistic Children. While the film is watchable once it has no replay value. This is a bad B- movie with A-list actors and a predictable, stale script. Do not be fooled by the attempt to jack up the rating by the studio and the love some people have with big guns and shooting.
If you can put aside the incredible awkwardness that is Affleck's attempt to be an autistic man, you'll get through most of this film. What's difficult is to believe for one second that Affleck is autistic. Compare his preposterous awkwardness designed just to be Mr. Socially Awkward with Dustin Hoffman in Rain Man and you'll be laughing hysterically.
It features a slow moving beginning, something about how the government is trying to figure out who this mysterious math genius for the underworld is. For some reason his photo is never captured. That's because autistic people can somehow avoid the camera lens. There is some absurd reveal that comes later in how this story comes together. Several people were laughing in the theater when it came out.
Without giving away the premise of the movie, set yourself up for a laughable and predictable ending that sounds something like a monetary appeal for the Foundation to Help Autistic Children. While the film is watchable once it has no replay value. This is a bad B- movie with A-list actors and a predictable, stale script. Do not be fooled by the attempt to jack up the rating by the studio and the love some people have with big guns and shooting.
Memories of Murder
(2003)
They rarely make them like this in Hollywood
18 October 2016
Wow. What an experience on so many levels. What made this film more meaningful was researching the background of what was going on since it seemed to have historical meaning - and it does.
A rape and murder crime occurs in a small town. The bumbling, simpletons who are the police round up the usual suspects believing that they may have the suspect of what may be the beginning of a serial murderer. But as things progress, they are sent in a special detective from Seoul whose methods are more scientific and precise, not left to pure small town bias. The local detectives begin to realize their own failings and need to find answers elsewhere and focus on another. And the path where it leads them is most unsettling.
The dialog, acting and script are riveting. The film is painfully funny in certain places and deeply unsettling in others. Based on a true story, this isn't a horror film. It's crime / suspense with a meaningful script and character analysis. There is good reason why this film belongs in the best of all time. Highly recommended.
A rape and murder crime occurs in a small town. The bumbling, simpletons who are the police round up the usual suspects believing that they may have the suspect of what may be the beginning of a serial murderer. But as things progress, they are sent in a special detective from Seoul whose methods are more scientific and precise, not left to pure small town bias. The local detectives begin to realize their own failings and need to find answers elsewhere and focus on another. And the path where it leads them is most unsettling.
The dialog, acting and script are riveting. The film is painfully funny in certain places and deeply unsettling in others. Based on a true story, this isn't a horror film. It's crime / suspense with a meaningful script and character analysis. There is good reason why this film belongs in the best of all time. Highly recommended.
Mortdecai
(2015)
As horrible as Gwyneth's British Accent
17 October 2016
Wow... all that came to mind was WTF???? It's that terrible.
I love Depp, even his more unusual off the beaten path films. The cast is stellar with top names that practically guarantee that the film has to be watchable. I get the humor, the genre and what it is supposed to be. It's just not funny. At all. With very few good moments and a performance by Paul Bettany that is amusing enough to save the film from a rock bottom 1, this dud is a career ending dagger.
A painting is stolen and Mortdecai, a millionaire art dealer swindler who is also friends of the police chief, is asked to help investigate in exchange for the Crown not prosecuting debts it holds from our protagonist. Mortdecai is fond of his ridiculous moustache, hated by his wife (Paltrow) who is lusted after by the police detective (McGregor). And the superhero butler who is always there to save the day is Jock, played by Bettany, who is also the satisfier of women everywhere.
The film is way over the top humor. This is not anything close to Kingsmen - it's way, way over the top, caricatures of the usual players. Stupid stuff that is clearly beyond any reality, such as tailing kidnappers on a plane by holding onto the exterior of the plane for the entire trip - hahahaha! Isn't that funny!!! Cue in the zany British synth music and boy it's such a laugh.
Depp pulls off his accent for the most part although he loses it at times. Gwyneth Paltrow is unwatachable. Her terrible British accent has been legendary in past films such as Sliding Doors and Shakespeare in Love. Listening to it is torture and you don't have to be a Brit to wish the film was silent.
The story itself is pretty stupid and irrelevant as it is just a way of allowing Depp to do his painfully unfunny, self centered and unlikable character. Everyone is searching for the painting that has disappeared, including a bunch of Russian gangsters. Unless you're one of the few who liked this pile of unfunny trash, have another film as a backup because your company may just wish to turn this off early on. Unless you have eve a clue about British humor, you're going to wish you weren't curious enough to watch this heaping pile of stupidity.
I love Depp, even his more unusual off the beaten path films. The cast is stellar with top names that practically guarantee that the film has to be watchable. I get the humor, the genre and what it is supposed to be. It's just not funny. At all. With very few good moments and a performance by Paul Bettany that is amusing enough to save the film from a rock bottom 1, this dud is a career ending dagger.
A painting is stolen and Mortdecai, a millionaire art dealer swindler who is also friends of the police chief, is asked to help investigate in exchange for the Crown not prosecuting debts it holds from our protagonist. Mortdecai is fond of his ridiculous moustache, hated by his wife (Paltrow) who is lusted after by the police detective (McGregor). And the superhero butler who is always there to save the day is Jock, played by Bettany, who is also the satisfier of women everywhere.
The film is way over the top humor. This is not anything close to Kingsmen - it's way, way over the top, caricatures of the usual players. Stupid stuff that is clearly beyond any reality, such as tailing kidnappers on a plane by holding onto the exterior of the plane for the entire trip - hahahaha! Isn't that funny!!! Cue in the zany British synth music and boy it's such a laugh.
Depp pulls off his accent for the most part although he loses it at times. Gwyneth Paltrow is unwatachable. Her terrible British accent has been legendary in past films such as Sliding Doors and Shakespeare in Love. Listening to it is torture and you don't have to be a Brit to wish the film was silent.
The story itself is pretty stupid and irrelevant as it is just a way of allowing Depp to do his painfully unfunny, self centered and unlikable character. Everyone is searching for the painting that has disappeared, including a bunch of Russian gangsters. Unless you're one of the few who liked this pile of unfunny trash, have another film as a backup because your company may just wish to turn this off early on. Unless you have eve a clue about British humor, you're going to wish you weren't curious enough to watch this heaping pile of stupidity.
Cape Fear
(1991)
Badly miscast DeNiro and his accent
4 October 2016
In short, a bad man and convicted rapist (DeNiro) is released from prison after 14 years for a crime he probably did commit although it is open and questionable that he was guilty of that crime. The man who defended him (Nolte) is a criminal lawyer who withheld evidence because he didn't want to see this animal go free but he cheats on his wife and does a number of other questionable acts. So now DeNiro has come back to stalk Nolte and his family for revenge. Quite predictable and few surprises. And somehow, DeNiro's character is just super, super smart, savvy and able to accomplish anything so he can be creepy.
Robert DeNiro's horrendous southern accent is horrendous, making what could be a serviceable but predictable thriller into a comedy in every scene he is in. Sometimes you have to question the decisions of directors to force actors to play parts that may not be necessary, such as that of a southern criminal. But if you're going to butcher it so badly that any American will laugh his/her ass off, you're never going to pull off a thriller. As it moves on, it becomes more preposterous and choppy editing and absurd ending that is more worthy of a first time director. It was hard for me not to get a good long laugh at the twisted, overly long ending. If this movie didn't have the cast and DeNiro's name it would probably rate a 3-5.
This film is only redeemed by mostly excellent performances by the cast, a great Jessica Lange and a fantastic Juliette Lewis. DeNiro does what he can but that accent is truly cringeworthy and out of place.
This is a "nothing to do what's on cable?" movie. Don't expect to be impressed, color by numbers and quite mediocre with a generous 5.
Robert DeNiro's horrendous southern accent is horrendous, making what could be a serviceable but predictable thriller into a comedy in every scene he is in. Sometimes you have to question the decisions of directors to force actors to play parts that may not be necessary, such as that of a southern criminal. But if you're going to butcher it so badly that any American will laugh his/her ass off, you're never going to pull off a thriller. As it moves on, it becomes more preposterous and choppy editing and absurd ending that is more worthy of a first time director. It was hard for me not to get a good long laugh at the twisted, overly long ending. If this movie didn't have the cast and DeNiro's name it would probably rate a 3-5.
This film is only redeemed by mostly excellent performances by the cast, a great Jessica Lange and a fantastic Juliette Lewis. DeNiro does what he can but that accent is truly cringeworthy and out of place.
This is a "nothing to do what's on cable?" movie. Don't expect to be impressed, color by numbers and quite mediocre with a generous 5.
Morgan
(2016)
Amazing cast, dumb script, predictable ending done before many times
17 September 2016
Morgan is a lab created human, supposedly smarter and better than the average human. But she seems to be a little angrier and presents a problem. So in comes Mara's character, seemingly cold and a bit off although you're not sure why.
The premise for this movie starts out on an interesting note and descends quickly from there. Without spoiling the movie, the screenplay is terrible. And you know it early on because characters act in ways that don't make sense at all. If you want to antagonize someone, just treat them badly, threaten them, and don't act surprised. But the characters do, of course, as if out of the worst dumb horror films. And the stupidity and contrived nature of the characters is done because the film must move to the next part of the script.
This derivative junk doesn't know what it wants to be. It pulls pieces of various hit movies without putting it together in any coherent way. And the predictable ending itself doesn't even make sense. I don't know how Luke Scott would not see how poor this script was going, when his father created Bladerunner and numerous other classics. In my opinion the good reviews from critics are a result of lineage, not this crappy film.
Sadly the actors are A list. And even Giamatti's performance is laughably bad (people were bawling) because the script has him trying to convince the audience with a performance that is so out of character. Howling. At that early point you know you're in B to C movie territory. How bad is it? Splice is a four star film compared this knee slapper. The ending is the stuff of MST3K as well. Deus Ex Machina anyone?
The premise for this movie starts out on an interesting note and descends quickly from there. Without spoiling the movie, the screenplay is terrible. And you know it early on because characters act in ways that don't make sense at all. If you want to antagonize someone, just treat them badly, threaten them, and don't act surprised. But the characters do, of course, as if out of the worst dumb horror films. And the stupidity and contrived nature of the characters is done because the film must move to the next part of the script.
This derivative junk doesn't know what it wants to be. It pulls pieces of various hit movies without putting it together in any coherent way. And the predictable ending itself doesn't even make sense. I don't know how Luke Scott would not see how poor this script was going, when his father created Bladerunner and numerous other classics. In my opinion the good reviews from critics are a result of lineage, not this crappy film.
Sadly the actors are A list. And even Giamatti's performance is laughably bad (people were bawling) because the script has him trying to convince the audience with a performance that is so out of character. Howling. At that early point you know you're in B to C movie territory. How bad is it? Splice is a four star film compared this knee slapper. The ending is the stuff of MST3K as well. Deus Ex Machina anyone?
Don't Breathe
(2016)
Good effort but vastly overrated, stretched out horror flick
10 September 2016
Sadly so many of these noir/horror movies are made with great effort only to be spoiled by a handful of incredibly lame, stupid and lazy plot points. If you blindly accept the lazy setup, the first 2/3 of the film are well crafted before it devolves into a prolonged effort to keep the story going for an extra 20 minutes or else you'd have just a film an hour long.
The premise - 3 struggling Detroit 20 somethings rob homes by using alarm codes that are accessible to the father of one of the youths and stolen by the father's son. For some odd reason one of the youths heard that a horrible looking home is where an old army veteran lived who received a large settlement from a car accident lawsuit, which claimed the life of his daughter. Why they are sure that this man, who is supposedly blind, are so damn sure that the cash will be stored in the house and that they will somehow be able to find it and extract it is dubious at best. But let's play along with that scheme.
It takes a while for the setup to take place where the trio break into the old man's home to find quite a number of surprises. The first third and the early scenes are well done. The movie moves along at a reasonably quick pace with clichéd characters on the side but they don't really distract from the main attraction. The problems occur when the typical horror film implausibilities begin to take place. And while there is excellent suspense for a good part of the film, it takes the easy way out a number of times which lead to a realistic feeling horror/noir film becoming a bit of a self- parody, which many of them are.
Without giving the film away, the typical elements of horror films are there - characters that are almost impossible to kill because they are needed to prolong screen time. Chase scenes that someone allow characters to escape and show multiple views of the same characters with the attacker stuck in the same place for several different angles so that the protagonist can get away, albeit temporarily. It's not so bad at first but when you're at the 60 minute run time, it starts to become very noticeable.
And the most disappointing part has to be the ending. It's supposed to provide your typical "woah" ending but mine was rolling my eyes at the ceiling at this film's way too hard effort to end up in such a fashion. They forced it badly.
None of these detriments will ruin at least one view of the film. It's totally forgettable derivative drivel. But the suspenseful moments are well crafted and at least for an hour it will keep you entertained and wondering what will happen next. Could and should have been better. It's a B+ -- and at least it's not another dumb Saw torture porn film. This one is more about suspense.
The premise - 3 struggling Detroit 20 somethings rob homes by using alarm codes that are accessible to the father of one of the youths and stolen by the father's son. For some odd reason one of the youths heard that a horrible looking home is where an old army veteran lived who received a large settlement from a car accident lawsuit, which claimed the life of his daughter. Why they are sure that this man, who is supposedly blind, are so damn sure that the cash will be stored in the house and that they will somehow be able to find it and extract it is dubious at best. But let's play along with that scheme.
It takes a while for the setup to take place where the trio break into the old man's home to find quite a number of surprises. The first third and the early scenes are well done. The movie moves along at a reasonably quick pace with clichéd characters on the side but they don't really distract from the main attraction. The problems occur when the typical horror film implausibilities begin to take place. And while there is excellent suspense for a good part of the film, it takes the easy way out a number of times which lead to a realistic feeling horror/noir film becoming a bit of a self- parody, which many of them are.
Without giving the film away, the typical elements of horror films are there - characters that are almost impossible to kill because they are needed to prolong screen time. Chase scenes that someone allow characters to escape and show multiple views of the same characters with the attacker stuck in the same place for several different angles so that the protagonist can get away, albeit temporarily. It's not so bad at first but when you're at the 60 minute run time, it starts to become very noticeable.
And the most disappointing part has to be the ending. It's supposed to provide your typical "woah" ending but mine was rolling my eyes at the ceiling at this film's way too hard effort to end up in such a fashion. They forced it badly.
None of these detriments will ruin at least one view of the film. It's totally forgettable derivative drivel. But the suspenseful moments are well crafted and at least for an hour it will keep you entertained and wondering what will happen next. Could and should have been better. It's a B+ -- and at least it's not another dumb Saw torture porn film. This one is more about suspense.
Obsession
(1976)
Long, drawn out, horrible accent
31 August 2016
Pretty good movie if you can get by Lithgow's horrendous imitation of a southern accent. Why bother if Lithgow can't pull it off to save the world? It's that bad as he slips in and out of it and sometimes speaks with an odd, unidentifiable accent that says "trying way too hard." The movie itself takes you from a man who lost his first wife in a kidnapping gone wrong to a reincarnation of his wife - or so it seems - only to have some predictable reason as to why this too will go wrong.
Don't like saying it's a Vertigo copy but it does have a resemblance with a poorer script that is even less logical and with more twists. Some of it is very good and the performances by the leads are excellent. An average film with some poor casting and drawn out far too long. Not one of De Palma's best.
Don't like saying it's a Vertigo copy but it does have a resemblance with a poorer script that is even less logical and with more twists. Some of it is very good and the performances by the leads are excellent. An average film with some poor casting and drawn out far too long. Not one of De Palma's best.
Hard Eight
(1996)
Surprisingly good, superb acting
29 August 2016
I didn't expect much from this film, hoping to find something on cable - and this surprised by standing out. Philip Baker Hall is the main character here and he's a great and often overlooked actor that shines as a former gambler gone right, trying to straighten out the seemingly go nowhere life of a young man. Hall takes him in, teaches him the right path, but unfortunately the young man isn't too bright and his limitations and insecurities get the best of him, leaving Hall to make some difficult choices as his unexplained protector.
This takes you through the life of making small but decent money by smartly playing up the casinos. It always keeps you interested, even if Gwyneth Paltrow is the weaker link in this film. Samuel L. Jackson does his usual character and he's good with it.
A fantastic sleeper film. I enjoyed it.
This takes you through the life of making small but decent money by smartly playing up the casinos. It always keeps you interested, even if Gwyneth Paltrow is the weaker link in this film. Samuel L. Jackson does his usual character and he's good with it.
A fantastic sleeper film. I enjoyed it.
Dead Man Down
(2013)
Starts great, fantastic visuals, preposterous last third
28 August 2016
Wow, what a way to waste a good film. The visuals are interesting. The setup is neat albeit confusing to some degree. Unfortunately sloppy, lazy editing is where the viewer is given the knowledge that the next 2/3 of the film is going to be a loser. Without ruining the film, the "spontaneous video" shown could never have been taken with a phone camera. It's insulting to the viewer to even suggest it. And what begins to be a possibly interesting movement towards the conclusion begins to unravel badly into clichéd Hollywood moments.
I give the film 2 points for great visuals. 1 point for some great actors doing their good work, Farrell being nothing special. And another point for a good start. And the last point because at least it wasn't terribly boring. But the last half becomes so unbelievable and the ending so preposterous and stupid that I almost feel like deducting points. I can only say that you should enjoy the film for part of the ride but be prepared to roll your eyes in disbelief and despair on multiple occasions on the way to the films pitifully Hollywood ending. Great start, limp to the finish.
I give the film 2 points for great visuals. 1 point for some great actors doing their good work, Farrell being nothing special. And another point for a good start. And the last point because at least it wasn't terribly boring. But the last half becomes so unbelievable and the ending so preposterous and stupid that I almost feel like deducting points. I can only say that you should enjoy the film for part of the ride but be prepared to roll your eyes in disbelief and despair on multiple occasions on the way to the films pitifully Hollywood ending. Great start, limp to the finish.
Hilarious, requires knowledge of older documentaries, hits or misses
25 August 2016
If you're over 30 or 40 you've probably seen the older documentaries. My parents are big fans of Cousteau stuff, which is really dated by today's standards. This film is a quirky, very funny parody of a ocean explorer who is well past his prime. His old films are the over the top, contrived but supposedly spontaneous majestic ocean nature documentaries. And if you've seen them, it's funny. It's more of a character study of a team that is doing what it can to placate a legend in the field of oceanography and also can be a bunch of stooges, since the captain is focused on a senseless revenge mission.
This is a totally hit or miss film. Like it or hate it. Get it or you don't get it. So I get the high ratings and think it's hilarious. The joy isn't in the plot itself as to what specifically happens but the funny journey along the way towards the unknown confrontation with an old enemy. There are some subplots, such as the "is he or isn't he" the abandoned son of the captain along with the love interest that is somewhat in between the Zissous.
What I like about this film is that at least it is an original effort and not yet another rehash of something else. It's humorous, not intended to be taken seriously at all and completely an exaggeration and satire of a time that is long gone and probably relates far more to an older generation. This is why you'll see many ratings from younger people who just hate the film, not getting the joke that this is a Cousteau parody, something they have never seen or a time which they experienced.
This is a totally hit or miss film. Like it or hate it. Get it or you don't get it. So I get the high ratings and think it's hilarious. The joy isn't in the plot itself as to what specifically happens but the funny journey along the way towards the unknown confrontation with an old enemy. There are some subplots, such as the "is he or isn't he" the abandoned son of the captain along with the love interest that is somewhat in between the Zissous.
What I like about this film is that at least it is an original effort and not yet another rehash of something else. It's humorous, not intended to be taken seriously at all and completely an exaggeration and satire of a time that is long gone and probably relates far more to an older generation. This is why you'll see many ratings from younger people who just hate the film, not getting the joke that this is a Cousteau parody, something they have never seen or a time which they experienced.
Troy
(2004)
Good, entertaining, Pitt horribly miscast
21 August 2016
When you've got some of the best actors with British accents and suddenly Brad Pitt comes on the scene and tries his go at it with something resembling American Shakespeare, you know it's going to fail miserably. And it does. Put him next to Bana, Peter O'Toole and even Legolas and Pitt sounds like a clown. He does his best but is really miscast.
The rest of the cast is fantastic, especially Bana, O'Toole and especially Brian Cox who is positively detestable. Very well done. The fact that there aren't any dull moments for this long behemoth of a movie speaks volumes as to its entertainment value.
If you can get past Pitt, this is definitely worth the watch and the production value is extremely high.
The rest of the cast is fantastic, especially Bana, O'Toole and especially Brian Cox who is positively detestable. Very well done. The fact that there aren't any dull moments for this long behemoth of a movie speaks volumes as to its entertainment value.
If you can get past Pitt, this is definitely worth the watch and the production value is extremely high.
Jason Bourne
(I) (2016)
A Bourne B-Movie, Bad Casting, Huge Plot Holes, Lazy Writing
31 July 2016
I'd give this a 5.5 because a 6 feels a bit too high and 5 a bit too low, having a 5 be the "average, so-so" film. Why?
1. Alicia Vikander is terribly miscast. Talented actress who was clearly more focused on trying to sound like an American than on actually giving a performance that showed a pulse. Having her take the role as second in command in the Bourne hunt (and Bourne sympathizer) was a very bad decision based solely on "who's the hottest new female star?"
2. The script thinks we're all stupid. So Jason Bourne is the most wanted man.... everywhere. Facial recognition dominates searches. Yet he walks out in plain site without any disguise and even just waltzes right into any country without any disguises whatsoever. In fact, he can even use his own name if he feels and he'll just get through because... Jason knows the script will find a way to make it work.
3. I won't give away the ending but it was insulting. Throughout the movie the writing is so lazy that the average precautions most take are simply not taken or nonsense is uttered so things can happen. We'll just find the IP address of whatever so we can do whatever because the plot must march on. The greatest hackers in the world will obviously not take precautions such as, oh, I don't know, like firewalls or any other protocols to prevent discovery. Perhaps even having tinted windows, a working set of window blinds.
4. Contradicts itself everywhere. The movie opens "I remember everything." Uhhh.... no you don't. Because if you did, half the movie you spend piecing things you don't remember wouldn't be an issue. So the con is on right from the opening credits.
This is a dumb movie. If you can totally check in your brain at the door you can be entertained. But make no mistake for a good movie - this is not one of them. Unlike the other Bourne films this one is not rewatchable and you'll forget all about the moment you're out the theater doors.
1. Alicia Vikander is terribly miscast. Talented actress who was clearly more focused on trying to sound like an American than on actually giving a performance that showed a pulse. Having her take the role as second in command in the Bourne hunt (and Bourne sympathizer) was a very bad decision based solely on "who's the hottest new female star?"
2. The script thinks we're all stupid. So Jason Bourne is the most wanted man.... everywhere. Facial recognition dominates searches. Yet he walks out in plain site without any disguise and even just waltzes right into any country without any disguises whatsoever. In fact, he can even use his own name if he feels and he'll just get through because... Jason knows the script will find a way to make it work.
3. I won't give away the ending but it was insulting. Throughout the movie the writing is so lazy that the average precautions most take are simply not taken or nonsense is uttered so things can happen. We'll just find the IP address of whatever so we can do whatever because the plot must march on. The greatest hackers in the world will obviously not take precautions such as, oh, I don't know, like firewalls or any other protocols to prevent discovery. Perhaps even having tinted windows, a working set of window blinds.
4. Contradicts itself everywhere. The movie opens "I remember everything." Uhhh.... no you don't. Because if you did, half the movie you spend piecing things you don't remember wouldn't be an issue. So the con is on right from the opening credits.
This is a dumb movie. If you can totally check in your brain at the door you can be entertained. But make no mistake for a good movie - this is not one of them. Unlike the other Bourne films this one is not rewatchable and you'll forget all about the moment you're out the theater doors.
The Wailing
(2016)
Great film, not flawless but why Hollywood is unwatchable
25 July 2016
Movies like these from South Korea are the reasons why Hollywood has become unwatchable. It may not be completely original and has some flaws. But the acting is excellent, the location is perfect for this type of a horror/macabre tale and the dialogue is always reasonably engaging.
In summary, something or someone is killing the people in a local small town. It's uncertain what is happening and who is behind it. Is it madness? A disease? But it also appears that some of the local people are killing each other and for an unknown reason, potentially some type of madness. Our protagonist is a police officer and his daughter becomes one of the afflicted. He tries to find an answer and also save his daughter from being another victim.
This is a pretty long film and at some point you wonder if it's really worth the payoff. And it gets surprisingly bloody at certain points too. It takes its twists and turns and it is engaging. The ending and meaning itself was very confusing to me. And parts of this movie follow the horror/macabre genre of "must act dumb" or "must not say anything for reasons unknown and not ruin a surprise." But otherwise, this movie is far better than the run of the mill. And it's creepy.
In summary, something or someone is killing the people in a local small town. It's uncertain what is happening and who is behind it. Is it madness? A disease? But it also appears that some of the local people are killing each other and for an unknown reason, potentially some type of madness. Our protagonist is a police officer and his daughter becomes one of the afflicted. He tries to find an answer and also save his daughter from being another victim.
This is a pretty long film and at some point you wonder if it's really worth the payoff. And it gets surprisingly bloody at certain points too. It takes its twists and turns and it is engaging. The ending and meaning itself was very confusing to me. And parts of this movie follow the horror/macabre genre of "must act dumb" or "must not say anything for reasons unknown and not ruin a surprise." But otherwise, this movie is far better than the run of the mill. And it's creepy.
I Am Wrath
(2016)
So bad it's good
23 July 2016
This is a truly terrible movie. Travolta and his wife are the victims of a mugging and he lives but his wife dies in the ordeal. As usual there is more to this than meets the eye when the police let the man Travolta identifies as the murderer. So he decides to go after them with street justice of his own.
Kill their families.... and kill their dogs!!!
That's the kind of cliché whopper of bad lines that exist in this movie. It's hilariously predictable as Death Wish takes on the corrupt cops, the kingpin and everyone else involved.
Someone chases my boy out of the tick tock!!
You've seen this 1,000 times. This is just by the numbers and poorly executed. Meloni plays his buddy, by the numbers, does what he can with the one dimensional script.
You wanna know how an Irish kid raised on welfare became governor? We contain situations, we don't blow them up.
There is a reason this crap never made it into the theaters. It's a straight to DVD vanity project that probably was presented to Travolta as an ego trip. His version of Liam Neeson, an awesome new hair piece (most impressive part of the movie.) Meloni looks more intimidating than Travolta but nobody really cares. All the orchestration of violence will leave our protagonist looking like he's only in his mid 50s.
This is just revenge porn and not very good. Have fun with this when there is nothing else on TV and you're truly in need for a low budget, mindless revenge flick.
Kill their families.... and kill their dogs!!!
That's the kind of cliché whopper of bad lines that exist in this movie. It's hilariously predictable as Death Wish takes on the corrupt cops, the kingpin and everyone else involved.
Someone chases my boy out of the tick tock!!
You've seen this 1,000 times. This is just by the numbers and poorly executed. Meloni plays his buddy, by the numbers, does what he can with the one dimensional script.
You wanna know how an Irish kid raised on welfare became governor? We contain situations, we don't blow them up.
There is a reason this crap never made it into the theaters. It's a straight to DVD vanity project that probably was presented to Travolta as an ego trip. His version of Liam Neeson, an awesome new hair piece (most impressive part of the movie.) Meloni looks more intimidating than Travolta but nobody really cares. All the orchestration of violence will leave our protagonist looking like he's only in his mid 50s.
This is just revenge porn and not very good. Have fun with this when there is nothing else on TV and you're truly in need for a low budget, mindless revenge flick.
Tell Your Friends