Deagy Reviews

Silent Hill (2006)

Holy Crap!

[9/10 · 23 April 2006]

FINALLY, a good horror movie for 2006! Not only that, but a good video game movie! I'm ecstatic that Uwe Boll kept his distance from this one, because the final product is just brilliant. Scary, but not in a cheap, jumpy way, but in a way that the film will crawl under your skin, then stay there.

Atmospheric, Gory, Nasty, Confusing, it's exactly like the games, and really faithful! As a huge fan, I was very very pleased. It has all that I wanted in it : Dahlia, Alessa, the Nurses, Lisa Garland, God and Pyramid Head!! An excellent movie (dodgy ending) and a generally faithful adaptation, try it out! (but not for a first date movie!)

The Hills Have Eyes (2006)

Where Did It All Go Wrong?

[6/10 · 18 March 2006]

I was so so psyched to be seeing this movie, the trailer looked promising, as did the initial reviews, and all this talk of dismemberment, rape, gore and tension got my hopes up. But unfortunately, The Hills Have Eyes went downhill from the opening scene.

Alexandre Aja's Switchblade Romance was actually one of the most terrifying movies I've ever seen, perfect on every account. But The Hills Have Eyes was an unimaginable let-down for me. The opening scene was neither scary nor gory, just plain ridiculous. This trend continued throughout the movie. It was just pointless gore, followed by more pointless gore and some strange stunts. Most ridiculous was the fact that a 15/16 (?) year old could make up a security system in the middle of a scorching desert, on his own, without hindrance, it made the movie laughable.

This movie was meant to be sick and disgusting and scarring. It wasn't. It was good FX and VERY LOUD NOISES every 30 seconds. It lacked any tension, atmosphere, or chemistry between the characters. The decision not to show the rape scene or the older sister getting shot in the head was a bad decision, because it leaves little else to merit the 18 certificate, and left the audience bored.

It had a few good points, the body part box was good, as was the music. But that's it...

Clichéd, Over Hyped, Loud and often Pointless, the Hills Have Eyes 2006 is just a wasted opportunity.

4/10

Lucky Number Slevin (2006)

Best Movie Of The Year So Far

[9/10 · 13 March 2006]

I have to say, I went to see the Hills Have Eyes, but ended up seeing this instead. It had a good cast, but I had an inkling it would be atrocious. Man Alive, How wrong was I!? The previous reviewer (yes Claire from Brighton, that's you!) must have been blind and deaf because I found it exceptionally difficult to pick a fault in the film. Fast, Witty and funny dialogue really make the 2 hours fly in. The plot, granted, was confusing in the middle, but everything came together perfectly towards the end. Perfect casting throughout, Liu and Freeman and Kingsley all give some fine performances, Hartnett suits being the protagonist with all odds against him and Bruce Willis breaks from the mould of playing the same character in every damn film he's in, so he gets points for that. Brilliant ending and opening as well.

So please, don't pay any attention to the negative reviews, this film is excellent, and you really get more than you paid for.

Go Now.

NOW!

House of 9 (2005)

What!? You AREN'T Saw 2? Oops, My Bad

[4/10 · 8 March 2006]

This movie bites, there's no way about it. There aren't many other words to describe this. The characterisation was minimal, the characters were pretty much all the same anyway, and the only reason I can see this movie getting an 18 rating is because of Dennis Hopper's horrific accent! Basically, 9 strangers are locked in a house, told to kill each other, the survivor gets 5 million dollars. That's it. No frills. A very slow pace, and some truly awful characters (yes Asher D, that means you)make you want to claw your eyes out. The best to watch is the Scottish Druggie, Shona. Funny and Nasty, she's a joy to watch alongside Suzie Amy. But that's just about it for the film, Kelly Brook is like a human vacuole, Dennis Hopper just looks confused and why is the prize in dollars if the movie is set in London? Durr...

That said, it has a VERY good ending, in my eyes anyway, and if you're a fan of Suzie Amy then give it a try. Otherwise, stay very very far away, and watch Saw 2 instead.

4/10

Final Destination 3 (2006)

Excellent

[10/10 · 12 February 2006]

I've always been a huge fan of the Final Destination series, mainly because it got me to look at the world in a whole new light. Granted, a slightly paranoid light, but a new light all the same. Any film capable of doing this deserves some recognition! The first and second were 2 gory, brash and trashy films, and didn't attempt to pretend they weren't, and the third followed the same route.

The plot in itself was pretty thin, and the characters were really just people on a hit list, no strong characterisation, but then, it wasn't needed! This is a no brainer snuff movie and it rocks. Some gratuitous amounts of gore, and a little nudity here and there and you have the perfect film to waste away the boredom welling up inside you after sitting through Harry Potter. The actors all do fine jobs, and the special effects are pretty much top-notch (when they're not CGI) and the pace just moves along nicely.

The 2 major bad points are : The CGI - It was pretty noticeable, and it did take away some of the magic of the Roller-coaster scene,in my opinion anyway, and secondly, it was way too short and there weren't enough deaths in it! That sounds a little demented, I know, but I actually found myself yearning for just a little more... but no. Excellent ending though, it surprised me, I have to say.

A good strong film altogether, a perfect date movie, but you'll never EVER look at a Tanning Bed (or a picture for that matter) the same way again.

GO SEE IT!

The Ring Two (2005)

Not so bad......

[6/10 · 2 April 2005]

I never expected this movie to blow me away. In fact, i was ready to be very disappointed. But (gasp) i wasn't. I really quite enjoyed The Ring 2, and even though it was in a totally different league to the original remake, i was entertained.

Why? Well, in The Ring, we got too little Samara for my liking, as she only really came into play in the last 10 or 15 minutes. But in the sequel, she comes back in good form and we see things from her perspective. The bit at the start (if you've seen it, you'll know what i'm talking about)after the opening scene made everyone in the room jump right out of their seats, an that impressed me, because i didn't see it coming. Sissy Spacek's cameo was a great treat at that point in the movie and she fits in well with the character.

But as with any movie, it has its flaws. For one, those ridiculous deer. They had the whole cinema in ructions of laughter, which really destroyed the atmosphere. Another qualm would be the fact that sometimes there can be a lapse in dialogue, where the actors struggle to deliver a badly written line, and its glaringly obvious when it occurs. But my main complaint is the general lack of fear. It doesn't take a lot to get me scared, but Samara failed to deliver the scares she rightly deserved, and for this, i felt a little ripped off.

All in all, like many sequels, The Ring Two is inferior to the original, but its by no means a bad film. The reason i think that its been getting such low marks is because its being compared to its predecessors. In comparison, its not so good, but as a stand alone, i think its an okay movie.