Reviews

5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Not nearly as bad as many would have you believe
11 May 2010
Warning: Spoilers
I'm confused. It would seem the critics and a number of supposed fans of the original NOES franchise decided long before this was released that they were going to hate this movie. I just don't understand this complete loathing of Hollywood choosing to remake horror films. The original is still there and available should you choose to watch it again. To the fans out there, if you're so averse to the idea of a remake, don't watch it. It's not mandatory. To me, it reeks of snobbery. Although I'm yet to see a remake that's actually improved on the original, some have come close.

Let's be honest, the original Friday the 13th was dire. Untypically, whilst still generally rubbish, a few of its many sequels actually bettered it. The remake too was awful, but not a great deal more so than its 1980 counterpart.

The only saving grace of the original Amityville Horror was that it was supposedly based on fact. The film, in actual fact, was distinctly average. The remake too was just about average.

On the other hand, take two of Craven's films that have been subjected to remakes – The Hills have Eyes and The Last House on the Left. I loved these two growing up but neither have aged particularly well. OK, so neither remake was too great, but they were both watchable and serviceable horror films. I could go on, but you get the gist.

Whilst I can't think of any good reason why a horror film should be remade, nor can I think of any good reason why not. Who cares? If it works, great. If it doesn't, so be it. Heaps horror films being released these days that aren't remakes are dreadfully sub-standard, so a failed remake just needs adding to that list. The supposed classic horror film you love isn't suddenly going to become dreadful just because a below-par reboot is made.

Let's make this clear – I loved the original NOES. I saw it when I was 10 years old and it scared me stupid. Incredibly, it still scares me today and is one of my favourite horror films. It was flawed, for reasons I've gone into on previous posts, but the principal reason behind its effectiveness was its truly brilliant villain – Freddy Krueger. I've watched all six sequels a number of times and have witnessed the decline in the quality of the films and, most notably, the decline of Freddy's scare-factor. He transformed from a horribly terrifying baddie in the first two into a spiteful and cr@p stand-up comic who happened to murder hapless teens in increasingly elaborate ways. Before the remake was even thought about, Freddy had already died a slow and horrible death thanks to a number of pitiful sequels. Consequently, to me, there was nothing to lose in an up-to-date reboot...

NOES 2010 undoubtedly isn't as good as the original and isn't nearly as effective in horror terms, but as remakes go, it's the best I've seen. Like the original, it's flawed, but for different reasons. Whilst I don't agree it was bad, the CGI was unnecessary. It wasn't required in 1984 (it obviously wasn't an option), so it shouldn't be now. Freddy coming through the wall and Tina being dragged around the bedroom were classic scenes and they've been ruined this time-around by this apparent necessity to use modern technology. Furthermore, the death scenes weren't particularly inspired and were surprisingly simple and unimaginative for 2010. However, this is where the negatives end.

I was expecting to thoroughly dislike the characters, but I didn't. Don't get me wrong, I wasn't too fussed about them either, but they weren't the deplorable bunch of fools we saw from NOES3 onwards. The dream sequences were sufficiently sinister. The back story, whilst somewhat off-kilter with the original, was good. The film too ultimately made more sense this time-around. Finally, Freddy. Nobody does it better than Robert Englund in the original, but Haley was as good as one could have hoped. He looked good and scary, kept the humour to a minimum and was unquestionably the foreboding presence that Freddy should be. My only problem was with the voice – too much echo.

This film gets an A for effort and a B- for execution. It was never going to go down well with the critics, nor it seems with a number of fans of the original. Granted, it could have been better but it could also have been a whole lot worse. Omitting the original, this would likely come first if I was to rate all the NOES films. I can hear the gasps from those hardcore NOES fans out there, but the truth is that the franchise was already bastardised a long time ago. The 2010 reboot has, if anything, reinvigorated it and reintroduced Freddy to a new generation as something he should be remembered for being – scary.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Shallow individuals + deep water = couldn't give a f*ck
19 January 2010
On the whole I preferred this more that the prequel Open Water (I know Adrift was the unofficial sequel, but you know what I mean). I hated Open Water. The two protagonists were unpleasant and, for me, the film lacked the suspense and terror people would have you believe.

Adrift, however, had more potential, with more characters, albeit not much more likable, and even a baby. The first hour or so was almost edge of your seat stuff, with the true horror of their desperate situation being depicted perfectly. However, once I'd got used to the fact that they were in the water and there was little hope of them getting back aboard, I lost interest and it all became a bit tedious. Putting horribly shallow individuals in deep water (nice) with little chance of salvation results in a complete lack of viewer sympathy, which ultimately impacts the movie experience. Furthermore, a needlessly ambiguous and nonsensical ending added frustration into the mix.
7 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Palindromes (2004)
3/10
Massively disappointed
30 April 2007
Whilst overrated, Dollhouse was good, Happiness was fantastic, Storytelling was somewhere between the two. Pallindromes, however, is, without question, the weakest of the bunch. It's true to say there are some good moments, particularly those of the dark humour synonymous with Solondz, but on the whole I found the experience to be incredibly weird and creepy. The drawn out section with Mama Sunshine and the gang was horrible; my skin was crawling the whole time. The awkward scenes with Aviva and the suitors to the father of her unborn child made me wince. While his previous films were shocking, they were compelling, innovative and plausible. Pallindromes was pure fantasy played out in a vile and putrid parallel universe. Think David Lynch doing an American Beauty.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Boo (2005)
1/10
Boo! Hiss!
7 November 2006
Boo was poor. Very poor. Picking it up on a few occasions in Blockbuster, tempted to rent it, I'd been put off by awful title and the fact I'd heard absolutely nothing about it (I'm not saying a film has to have smashed box office records for me to watch it, but I hadn't read even a snippet of information about it…anywhere). Nonetheless, I eventually relented after a recommendation from one of the guys who works in the store. However, my fears were realised the second the opening credits started. The reek of low budget was seeping into my lounge (I know a film doesn't have to be bad just because it's made on a shoestring). And so it continued…appalling acting, crap effects, insipid story. On the plus side, there was the odd scare, but these were drowned in all the other laughable attempts at horror. All said, I fell asleep just over an hour in and my wife filled me in on the outcome. One to avoid I'm afraid.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Brick (2005)
2/10
Pretentious nonsense.
24 September 2006
I've got to admit to never being particularly enamoured by film noir, so was therefore a little weary about watching this. A simple story, with some ostentatious dialogue to give the viewer the impression they're watching an intelligent and challenging piece of cinema. Every character was despicable and what was it with Brendan? Some hard as nails loner geek, wondering around getting randomly punched or randomly punching. Between all the grandiose dialogue and miserable faces, it seemed to consist of chases across the school grounds and car parks, culminating in punches being exchanged. The amount of whacks this guy received would have resulted in him being in a hospital bed after about 20 minutes into the movie.

No doubt, I'll now be considered to be of a lesser intelligence to those who thought this was wonderful, but the plain truth is that Brick is pitiful rubbish.
13 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed