Change Your Image
oaspag-71318
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Jurassic World Dominion (2022)
A very decent (if underwhelming in some points) conclusion. 8/10.
Hi there! I saw Jurassic World: Dominion last night on IMAX, it was the last day before phased out. This version of Jurassic Park was still quite powerful in the sound category but still overall had a certain 'quiteness' about it all (lacking the booming). Story: (spoilers ahead) this Jurassic World Dominion takes place about 5 or so years after Jurassic World. And we have Grady (Chris Pratt), we have Miss. Chastain, we got the Comeback from Dr. Grant (Sam Neil..always great, always); Laura Dern (his object of affection); and I forgot his name -- but he's Ian Malcom (in the film); the pseudo philosophical-scientist. We got a young new girl child (she is the daughter of one the scientists that died in the movie and we see 'flashbacks' of her/the mother in the past...talking about her daughter and that she found a way to make 'herself' pregnant - just like amphibians that can have 'babies' with their Own self (they just 'switch sex/gener' 'on demand' and 'become both' - the mother And the father - so the animal can birth, alone..without having ever made sex with the other gender). All this might seem interesting, but how do I feel about this movie...ok..let's say underwhelmed. I mean it's not bad in any sense, far from it. It has action, intrigue, mystery, is relentless, there are many Different Actors and stars...they put the whole load' in this...they really wanted to make it a great conclusion chapter. So then? Why am I not More enthusiastic...about it. Because: This film, sadly, suffers from the Alien Covenant problem (vs the Alien 1 film) --> Everybody wants the Limelight on screen; but, such is not possible; and that is what happened in Alien Covenant; it was not a Great success like Alien 1 was; because every character in that film 'had to be the 'star'/limelight spot'...in effect, everybody is trying 'to steal each other's lime light/spot/10 minutes on screen'. This causes the effect that the viewer is not sure 'who is suppose to be the 'hero?'...who are we suppose to care (of/more -of) than whoever else; confusion - ambiguity - lackluster experience (characterization suffers). With that said, I think that Mr. Pratt, Mrs. Chastain, Mr. Neil, Mrs. Dern and Mr. Malcom (in the film) due a fair job - with the script they received; they sort of 'save it' from being worse than it is. The action, while relentless and 'going all over the world'..., is kind of hard to follow a bit and takes (as said) 'all over the world' and is frenetic - non-stop - moving from 'one goalpost to the next'. Story is about 'biosyn' a company that used the mother/young girld child's DNA because it could cure humans' diseases; but, of course, it has nefarious plans; or let's say, the 'boss' in the film (played by a very 'calm' man) ...who loses it; Anyway, to conclude this review (lengthening a bit, sorry); Jurassic Park Dominion is a bit of a let down (I'm angry and sad about it; I had seen the Trailer it was spectacular..but sadly, the trailer, is better a bit than the -full movie itself); a few other conluding things -- the Dinosaurs; Wow, amazing, amazing VFXs, the CGI is albsoltely breathtaking, for that, I loved it; so many new dinos -- especially the Giganotosaurus; incredible dino; he gets to fight with the T-Rex; you got Diplos, you got Velociraptors (Blue is back..and she/he gets to make a 'lil' raptor baby..who Grady will return to her/his mom/dad 'Blue' raptor...after the baby raptor is stolen.. by byosin or mercenaries for hire/for byosin); you got beautiful Malta in full display there; also two great actors, I don' remember their names, but she is the aviator in the film and also the previous guy from Jurassic World (Omar); plus, you got Dr. Wong, who has been there since the first Jurassic Park. His role is brief, but he is in collusion with byosin -- he regrets what he did, and it will cause 'famine' everywhere in the world (food shortage), as these locust swarms eat the crop fields..this isfrom the DNA dino experiments...he is doing. And wants to extract the DNA from the little girl (who's mother 'had her' alone/was both male/female at the same time -- toget pregnant with her daughter; like, hermaphrodite or, androgyn). The sounds, Wow, thuogh were softer in the 'shrunken/handicapped' IMAX I saw them..they were still much more pounding and powerful than in a regular theater showing the same movie (I did, still good, to see it in IMAX, it was an experience; albeit -a stunted one). Some people say: 'Liemax'...well, it's kind of true for the smaller ones (It is 5-10$ more...thus, you almost pay double for IMAX; it should meet that, fully). IMAX 3D has now, sort of, been phased out (for Real-D-3D and UltraAVX); which do good job of 3D; but, don't' approach the feeling of a Full-sized Imax; I guess the IMAX 3D was stopped because it was a 'fad' and it lost appearl (COVID-19 put a nail in the 'theatral/movie theater' coffin); people, just decided to go see 'in good ol 2D' and/or watchin on Netflix, safe at home (away from 'noisy/annoying people' in theaters....). The experience is always bigger on big screen/IMAX; but, I am guessing, it's just not enough anymore; comfort and convenience are what prime -- at home, in comfort, on netflix, at the 'touch of button/click'...like the old 'pay per view' cable films; you just watch the film on your big hd tv or your Home Cinema 'theater' Projection screen 'made in house' room for that. Still, I don'T regret it, you'll have fun and action is there; it's just..slightly lacking that 'little' thing..I give it a generous 8/10.
Guilt (2020)
Film Message: Don't Take the Law in Your Hands.
Hi there! Saw this and wished to give my pov. Just a 2 cents.
Guilt is a film that is trying to send a message (mixed message in the end), which is don't take the law in your hands. Spoilers ahead. The Story: is a woman (Mrs. Shay, Jesse) that is a psychologist (she was in the Iraq/Afghanistan war and, later; now, making a life in the US, as psychologist, and living alone in an apartment) whom patients consult her and tell her their life/mental problems; which she listens (as psychologist/therapist). Jesse is very calm and 'listening'...she etches doodles in her doodlebook - while patients tell her her their life/misery(s)...the film makes us think (by not showing us what she is writing/the camera angle) that she writing about her patient's/what they tell her about their life...but, in fact, she is not. She is sketching the 'next' person she will target - child molester(s)/pedophiles and basically, very low lifes, whom are 'free' (may or may not have purge their time/sentence for their molesting crime)... thus, we understand that it is Revenge movie/Vendetta movie, or also called, Vigilante (Justice) Movie; the film is called 'Guilt'...it is self-explanatory. And on the poster, we see Jesse dragging a body bag (one of the molesters - she terminated). Jesse is deciding to be (the saying) 'Judge, Jury and Executioner', as she goes on 'night hunts' (in daytime she is psychologist, at nightime she is vigilante), to hunt the 'bad guys' roaming free and being a threat to the children. Whom, the criminals deserved some punishment; that much is true and obvious. Now, the film is trying to say it is not 'black or white'..there are shades of gray. And that you cannot decide to take the law in your hands - like she does. Because, when looked from the surface - she is doing a good thing, a good deed, removing the people that sexually prey on children...therefore, people should be happy that she is doing the Justice - that justice itself Failed to deliver. As in, the criminals are 'walking free' and 'their punishment was a joke' - in measure compared to their crime. That, they should not be set free/that they are animals - that need to stay in cage/in prison for the rest of their life/days. So as to not be a threat in society anymore (or ever again). Thus, the film is saying : ''What do you do...when the law fails you, fails to give you justice, is unjust and someone walks free and is guilty through their teeth; and the punishment they get is basically a tap on the wrist and 'candy sentence' - and then they are 'set free again' in the open (society), 'to be rehabilitated' in rehab/rehabilitation....that they should be given a 2nd Chance...to redeem themselves',. Jesse is basiaclly saying/thinking : '' IT's pointless..going to court to have my rights be respected...to hand down the correct sentence punishment on these child molesters...that all deserve to die..why waste my time - going to court - it's pointless...these lawyers protect these monsters 'walking free again' and prey on kids...while us citizens live in fear the next door neighbour is one of them, the Law does Not Work...and going to court to 'vote it out/Change It'..is pointless/does not change anything..they still are on the streets...so what is there left to do to Obtain Justice?''. Jesse: ''Me. The Judge, Jury and Executioner - will Obtain/Exact the Exact Justice - that should have been Exacted - because it was not, and we never obtained justice...it is, thus, injust/unjust - UNjust Justice System/Corrupt justice system that favors these criminals - over the victims''. Therefore, she feels ''only one thing left to do...me, to do it'..so she goes on the night rampages and offs everyone of them. Police at a certain point the film 'catch her'...and 'peace things together'...when they find her apartment and see the 'photos of the molesters on the wall' (the next ones to be targeted) - they connect the dots, she is the one doing this (vigilante/vendetta) 'get justice' justice. The fim does a good job in nuancing and saying : ''it's hard...to 'slice this'...these peoeple deserve a punishment...but is it ok to go on 'child molester killer sprees'...people would not object all that much - if she can remove the molesters - she is doing everyone a Favor - when the police/justice is Useless against these criminal people''. During the film, there is man that organizes a ''We want justice'' group...and he is saying : ''That molester...fker...needs to be in prison...he roams free on the streets...we never got justice''...Jesse partakes in the group and the police connect the dots when the man says (after police asking him if there was one member that was a bit too overzealous - because the molester is dead): ''Oh...there was this woman she came and she was not from around...''. That's when the police connect the dots and realize that it is her (an out of town vigilante) that is doing this, there are too many aggravating factors to just be coincidences; it'S her. Thus, jesse is Stuck and knows now that she is the one being hunted (even at that point, her secretary stumbles on ehr doodlle book - she is left crying/horrified - the doodle book is full of 'kill y'all - and even a hung molester (grace)'', she thought that Jesse was doing her regular 'psychotherapist' work...about writing of her patients miseries...but no, it'S basically a doodle killbook of child molesters; Jesse runs back to her work and stumbles on her secretaty that 'found out'...and she tells him :''I won't hurt you...'' as she takes her doodle book from her hands. She runs away again to Grace (one of the child molesters she abducted at gunpoint), Grace has been locked, she is the female child molester in this film and the film Makes Us Think she is guilty...but then later, one of the siblings/friend of Grace confesses that is was all the fault of Grace's boyfriend/husband whom trafficked children/molested them. That Grace, herself, was a 'victim' of her boyfriend's 'stronghold', Grace repeatedly tells Jesse that she is innocent and was Scared that her bf would kill her - if she did not comply with him. But Jesse does not buy it and tortures her and straps her on a chair. That's at that point that Jesse realizes her vigilanteism went too far and she si wrong - Grace Is innocent (after the confession from the other related guy who said he lied about his testifying in court); same thing, in the film for an old man (a flashback where Jesse shoots dead an old man who is unfailry accused of child molester...She regrets her error later when found out later He Is Innocent..that makes you realize can't take law in hands, ->a mistake, some people Are Innocent; worse justice, is->Wrongfully Accused.
It Chapter Two (2019)
2centswise. chapter 2.
Hi there! Just a 2 cents or a penny.
I saw this film online (missed it in theaters, although theaters are becoming deserted with the virus happening) and was really looking forward to it. I can say it is a great film (not to Oscar level but very good yes). I read the reviews after seeing it and I am amazed (in the sad way) that it takes so much for people to find anything good these days (I'm not difficult in general with most films, no that does not mean I have no taste or I am witless -> Tastes will be tastes, to each their own). It's like that:
Lots of films, lots and lots of films -> People want Excellence, each time now. Because, now, more critical and 'don't have time/money' to give to 'lesser' film...
That's a huge problem these days, and not just films basically everything in arts (movies, books, video games, art pièces, etc). Nothing is ever good enough.
I will respect people's opinion about this film, I just find it sad that people can't be happy (about anything). Are there derivative films, books, etc...? Absolutely, but the Entire domain of art is derivative in itself. I don't like this word but it is what it is; films are influenced by everything and many other films before. Things can repeat themselves at some point (at the 1millionth film). Everything has been made/done/created/invented...not much more to do/invent/be original.
In other words people should be more lenient and forgiving instead of hypercritical and judgmental about everything. But such are our times.
Anyway, to review this film here, for my opinion/feeling, I loved it.
I watched the First It and it was great, I remember watching the It film in 1980s...great film. The remake was great...and this one too.
''But...CGI...But...boring story....But....CGI....But....Not scary....But...Jump Scares...But.....CGI....But want Practical Effects/Make-Up....But...But...But.''
Look we are in 2020, yes the audience still decides what goes in the film, but we aer Today and today, things are bit diferent about how they are made. That the films (It Chapter 1 remake and Chapter 2) are not like the original 80s anyone is normal...we are today/things in film are made differently for Various reasons.
CGI is used to save money (albeit it can be costly), in general, it saves a lot, it is economical and why is used. It is also safer (don't need to have stunt people), there is a place for it, jsut like any other tools (like prostethics). No, it does not look good as those old 'real' effects, true, but it looks pretty good even so. There is good blend of real and CG effects in this film, ok yes, there is more of them, but I thought they are Extremely well-made (you can tell this is Not a crap VFX movie, they put Lots of effort in them and they look pretty impressive.) People are taken out of it becasue they can't 'suspend their disbelief' when they see a CGI pennewise clown. Suspend it. I did it, anybody can. It takes convincing yourself and not 'seeing CGI'...because that'S what people are doing, don't focus on that, focus on the 'whole'. But people focus on micro-détails and say :''That's it I'm disengaged in this film/I just don't 'get in it' because everything looks fake''. It is like when you were Young and your mommy would tell you a story in bed...you have to get in it - you have too even if you don't believe it for a second.
Story: 5 or 6 friends from early days get back togethere to destroy an ancient evil force that lives in the town sewers; taking the form of a 16th century costumed 'renaissance-style' Clown. Pennywise. The town is called City of Derry. The Second Chapter is them as adults (first chapter was children). In first chapter they k*ll him and so it ends like that. In 2nd chapter he comes back 27 year later. Mike the friend in the group calls them all back - after nearly 30 years....it's awkward. But they were best friends so he tells IT is back, and IT wants to end it (them - not IT...I know confusing). The Clown is a manfestation of their fear...because clowns are a fear humans have. Clowns are scary because they related to childhood. Children....clowns make children laugh and give them funny balloons...except this clown...is no clown; but death with jaws and k*iller wits. He can sense their fear and this film has a lot of 'Nightmare of Elm's Street' vibes...where Freddy was in 'the nightmares'..came to you while you slept. IT is clear the director of this film plays on that. By going the people's fear and by exploring this past through flashbacks whence they were Young kids. IT 2 tries to blend pure horror with comedy, in some places it might be a bit shoehorned in...but most of the film did a great job of meshing 'jokes' with serious horror/scares. There quite a few jumpscares..but Nothing that really Terrifies you..but yes this film is scary (By moments) and have lots of comedy thrown in the two (because the film is trying to make moment of 'relief' and comedy...to not be continuously scary). Now I know some peolpe hate that because it is neither comedy nor horror but a mash-up. Yet, I would say, this film blends it very well and Nothing is so cringey or really dumb...or takes you of it. Because, the film is capable of exposing their lives with lots of details...flashbacks etc...these Feel like real people Not fake people. They crack jokes and constantly are 'self-aware' of their situation whic is 'implausible' yet they make it plausible. Because they laugh of it and go straight in it. And there are moments where they cry, they are completely frozen in fear....the film does really good job of showing Nuanced characters. I read the reviews and some said ''we don't care about them, they have 0 characterization....''. I have a diffrent opinion, I believe they are Very characterized, through Many Many flashbacks and we know their Entire life...I even felt bad when one person dies..because you Care about them - All. Like a group of friends. Real people, they tease each other, they make jokes, they Even face a Monster...in the film...talk about cool. Very few films can blend this so well. It makes me think of the film 'Drag me to Hell', 'Evil Dead', 'Army of Darknes''...those old comic-horror films of the 80s, that did a nice job of blending comedy and horror (also 'Shaun of the Dead'...like that).But if I were to compare these films to IT Chapter 2...I was much more scared in it, because the film going quite serious in its horror when it does happen; there are a Lot of F* bombs word in this film..which is a no-no in films..but here it works because these people are real and talk real. The actors were Really good and did their best to give it all. All of them went through the all gamut of emotions during the film. I understand people may not like this if don't like comedy-horror combo; either one or the other, but not both. As for the CGI, cut some slack. It was very good and loved this film. It is 3 hours long but I was very rivited for whole this time...I truly feel I had a great time watching this, even if 3 hours long. IT was not long because enjoyed it very much. I look forward the IT Chapter 3 very much. If people want to make a IT like they want...they can go do it, but making films is Huge process and you can't please everybody. Just a 2 c/penny.
Child's Play (2019)
Good. If slightly deceiving, but as remake, good.
Hi there! Just a 2 cents.
I saw this tonight and was overall happy, but truthfully, it felt a bit underwhelming for me. But, still, solid. I knew that it would not be the same as the original and this remake even veered away from the original's premise which was that an evil spirit had possessed the doll, that of a serial killer whom 'transfered' his soul in a doll before his death; then, the doll, Chucky, was the serial killer (Brad Dourif) - as a doll. In this new take/remake, Chucky is Buddi and he an artificial AI doll that goes 'haywire'...when a Vietnamese (at the start of the film) decides suicide himself (after his boss fires him) in Vietnam Buddy dolls factory...he removes all the 'safety' protocols of this one Buddi doll...and then the doll is dynsfunctional and turns murderous when it learns of 'killing' and its 'circuits lose it'...The young actor in the film is quite good in acting and helps this film strongly...he's a young boy being raised by his solo mother and they try to make the best of it (she works in a 'Zed Mart' place...that sells Buddy Chucky dolls...); when one dolls becomes defective she decides to ask the manager to 'keep it' for as present to her son.....so then Buddi will end up in their home...and that's when all things fall apart.
Buddy/Chucky is very friendly and says - repeatedly to Andy (the lil boy) : ''Are we having fun''...''You are my best friend Andy''. And for Buddi, the doll means it Litterally..in a sense that during the film the boy is scolded by his mother's bad boyfriend and will eventually kill him for : ''Nobody touches my friend Andy''...and then later, a grand-ma next door will suffer same fate, again Buddy: ''You will never be the best friend of Andy...I am'', because the grand-ma says :'' you're my new best friend...'' to Andy...but Buddy takes Slight to that.
The boyfriend, the grand-ma neigbor and house cat are killed viciously by the dolll which exacts vengeance for anyone saying something bad or hurting Andy...at a certain point Andy starts to understand that the doll is completely wack and insane, the A.I. in it does not understand that Andy does not want the doll to hurt/kill anybody...but Buddi...just doesn't understand : ''I thought we were having fun ... and they hurt you. I'm your friend, forever''. So Andy is losing it because he can't do anything with this creepy robotic doll, he's stuck with it and then after it kills on its own at night - and Andy understands the predicament Buddi puts him in, he now becomes a suspect because nobody would believe him that a murderous 'doll toy killed all these people'; so, he would be suspected of being the killer (insteay of the doll). So he hides it all and with his friends...they had enough and want to terminate Buddi; Buddi is killed and Andy throws him the dump...but, by chance (or unchance) the building cleaning man looking at the garbage sees Buddi's carcass..and wants to keep the doll, and revive it - so he does. And then Buddi, is alive again, and he immediately kills this man - and wants to go back to Andy (because for Buddi, Andy is his only friend - always, even after death/attacked by Andy). But, this time, he's angry (his eyes turned 'red' when angry...otherwise he has deep blue eyes and looks unsuspicious/doll-like), you can tell he is in 'kill mode' when his eyes change..he goes to Andy (Andy suspectes that Buddi came back in a 'clone' doll..another Buddi that is messed up (another robot doll that is wack), but he realizes that it is exactly the doll he put down that is back. And Buddi says: '' Andy...why did you hurt me...we are best friends... you hurt me... you broke me ... I will open you to verify of what you are made up inside - to see if you have a heart. Andy don't run, I am coming''..obviously, Buddi means that literally, he intends to kill Andy/or hurt him badly for killing him. He abducts his mother and uses her a a bait to catch/make Andy come when Andy finds out his mother was trapped in the mall (there was an unvelieving of the new Buddi 2 in the Zed Mart with tons of people/kids wanting the new toy...in that moment, Buddi jams the store everyone is killed by Buddi, he uses 'drones' with chopping blades that kamikaze on people. Except, his friends whom escape intact of the mall and he decides to stay in it - because he sees mother captured by Buddi...so it's him alone vs Buddi to save him mother.
The film did a great job of capturing the doll-like 'innocence' of the doll...you feel that this toy 'seems' a nice toy/doll...but very early you get a feeling that is a creepy doll that probably will turn bad. The film itself is more closer to a 13 or 16 rating in terms of audience age...I was surprised...overall...there is not that much gore/blood in this film...I think they did that to obtain a lower rating for more public audience/have young people see the movie too. But, yes, there is blood/gore by times, pretty gruesome, but most is quick and fast; so, the camera is not showing much - unlike the original version far more blood/gory. This film was not scary per say...but by times yes, mostly creepy...because it's a doll...and the doll itself is the symbolism/representation of 'child'...the doll is the size of a child. Chucky/Buddi was voiced by an old person in the original, here too, but the freakishly scary Chucky...is much less so now. Chucky in Child's Play original was far more 'evil' and deadly like. Now, he,s more like a sick robot doll. it's not to say he's not scary...but...a robot is less scary...than a possessed voodoo doll/with a spirit of serial killer vs an electronic robot that pops a couple of wires/transistor and goes hay-wire. What is interesting and more relatable, is that the film is more realistic per say..than the original...it could be possible that an evil AI robot doll...do this if it learns to kill. It's not science-fiction anymore. While, in the original movie, it's a paranormal (voodoo) sci-fi spirit possession horror. So, in that sense, the movie is far scarier for that...imagine getting a 20 inch tall doll that seems friendly and all, and is all electronic/A.I controlled...what says that A.I. (with deep neural thinking) could not learn something 'bad'...and someone could actually make a doll - do bad - on purpose (just like the early in film suicidal Vietnamese factory worker 'programmed' the defective doll to kill humans...), it's not a far fetch scenario as we enter the robotization/automatization and A.I..today...it's coming, robots will come more and more, and A.I. is the next revolution in all the industries (even beating the computer itself). because it can learn, like a child...or like a child doll...with an evil A.I...like Buddi.
I wanted it to be better, of course, but, overall, I had a good time and it does the job - it is not as good at the original...I would say it compares to Child Play 2/3...sort of...in terms of quality/effort. But, for a remake, they remade it (and it's always very hard to 'beat the original'..if impossible, so the remake is well-done); and even added their own twist to story/Chucky doll by updating it to the times of today (A.I. robots), so that's a plus. The original was more 'evil-like' freaky scary 'demonic possessed doll' horror like, this one is more evil-robot- doll like. I give a generous 8.
The Predator (2018)
Decent. Not incredible but Good. 8 on 10.
Hi there! Just a 2 cents.
I recently rented The Predator 2018, I had completely missed it in theatres..(2018, I completely did not go to theaters...for other reasons..so I missed Many films in 2018 in theaters; but now I'm trying to catch up/makeup and rent them/buy them on Blu-ray).
I have to say when I saw the Predator remake I was ecstatic and thought ''this will be incredible - for sure''...but I guess I fooled myself and 'overexpected' it of it....still, don't get me wrong, it's not bad by all means; it's decent and still well put as Predator film...If I were to compare this film, it falls 'square'/neatly between 'Alien VS Predator' franchises and the Alien 1 film...so 'in between' kind of..If I compare this to Predators film by Mr.Rodriguez director...it is poorer though (his film was better). And I compare this to Alien Covenant or Prometheus; again it's slightly poorer; but comparable to Alien Covenant, but a weaker and less production value. So it's not a failure but not 'total success' either; it's ok and still good, just don't expect 'to be blow away' or anything.
It's hard..it's simple that..making remakes - or, should I say - Remaking Remakes...is not easy because everything is riding in the balance, you are carrying this 'baggage' from the last films..obviously, people will compare your film to the past versions...and, generally speaking, 99% of remakes are weaker than the original...but there are some to Outdo the original, it's just rare because it'S extremely hard to remake something - as Better and even Newer, than the very original one (so it always ends up feeling lackuster or complete mess up/failure vs the old original 1 on which it is based/calqued/copied/inspired from).
The VFX and the prostethics are really - truly...there is large budget in this film and shows, FOX gave the go to serious prod values...and you can tell they wanted to make a great Predator remake. The film story is simple:
- A Space Ship travels the universe space and then closes in on Earth...the aliens on that space ship - are Not Aliens (pun intended...not 'those Aliens of H.Giger') but rather extra-terrestrial alien Predators...tall human-like creatures with a 'crab-like' face, twin blades on one arm and jamaican 'Dreads' for hair...these so called 'Predators' are truly fitting of that name...they are Hunters and Game Fowl Hunters - in any planet they wish..for them it is 'blood sport' they just kill for killling (not because of food need but because they are murderous monster 'alien' creatures that enjoy killing/hunting for the thrill of it) becaues they are Very good at it and like to 'hunt/Predate' on innocent preys - humans in this case. They rack up human 'skeleton/skull' trophies of their former 'hunt kills', like a hunter/predator. In the film you have a couple decent actors and they crack jokes about 'aliens' 'being real'...the protagonist is a soldier whom is thrown to jail and tries to convince people he is not crazy and, that indeed, he is right - Aliens Exist. The Spaceship comes close to earth and lets go a pod....the pod enters the stratosphere and lands in America (where else) and the townfolks will have to 'defend' against a 'Hunter Predator' with a lust for human blood/'Predating'. They will have to 'band together'..because at a certain point in the film the main Predator Hunter is faced with Another Predator..this time a Really Big one - called a 'Predalien'...a mixture of Predator and Alien...or rather the 'Boss Predator'...he measure something like 11-feet tall and is twice the size of the 'normal predator'...so, yeah, he makes mince meat out of the normal predator (at one point they fight together on a baseball court...while the protagonists bands have a chance to flee the scene...basically, this Predalien is just unkillable...but they will kill him when they finally get a rocket launcher and attack him from all sides...later in the fim; but it takes everyone to put him down, because nothing stops it). The characters are sadly not developped that much; but the main soldier protagonist is enough and we see his family (his wife)..and the film is actually a nice touch for it does not take it Too seriously about 'aliens existing' and laughs off that point..the characters often make jokes of aliens...but these comic moments are brief and then the movie goes into full 'thriller' and with horror elements - it's quite bloody/gory and gross by time, but never to point of unwathchable, this is like hard PG-13 or R-18 light. All in all, I'm still satisfied from it, I give a generous 8/10.
Just a 2 cents.
What Keeps You Alive (2018)
Heart Pounding. Ultra-Tense. Visceral. Canadian Horror-Thriller. 9/10.
Hi there, just got back from seeing this at Fantasia festival. The director was there and I applauded him.
I knew, just by the presentation/photos I saw of it weeks before that this would be incredible, and it was. I, purposely, skipped watching the trailer back then, to have the maximum surprise effect (you are in it for a big surprise!), you can watch the trailer but this film works best the less you know beforehand coming in. It is a simple story but told extremely well (I will reveal stuff/possible spoilers ahead). The story revolves around a gay lesbian couple (something very original here and adds a new dimension) whom decide to settle/make their life in an idyllic Canadian outdoor area near the water/in the pitoresque country backwoods. The imagery is grand and beautiful, the camera that was used is of the HD digital ones (it is apparent), the image is sharper which contrasts analog 35mm film which has more grain/fuzzy soft look - the image is truly popping in this film because of the use of digital camera - but it has that 'digital' crisp feeling that 35mm does not have. It's not a bad thing per say, just that the eye can detect imagery difference between digital vs analog. Analog 35mm has deeper color depth than digital (digital, even HDR True Color 48-bit (billion colors), still cannot equal a film celluloid negative in color presentation because the negative film is 'chemically' created by the reaction of light on the negative celluloid filmpellicule (light photons create the image during chemical reaction; think, like a photo slowly coming out of an old Polaroid camera after a photo snap and its colors gradually making the image visible (chemical reaction))). Digital camera makes digital signal full of pixels, with a digital camera the digital aspect becomes more obvious because the film itself is in DCP digital format. But, coming back to the story, the two women are madly in love, or so we think; one thing is sure, one is truly mad. Twisted beyond salvage. Sicko. To resume the story, one of the two women is a murderous monster hiding behind a beautiful façade, but very early on - you just know she's pretty, but a (pretty) sick woman and she is a bit 'offish', you know she's devious or of ill will, just looking her face/uneasy facial expressions, she is a 2-faced trickster liar and; all along, before we understand that, we get that vibe that she is the culprit.. of something. And, indeed, she is. Having murdered countless women before. It thus becomes a game of pure viscerality as the innocent woman (Jules) is thrown in a cat-and-mouse nightmare where she is the mouse. The antagonist (Jackie) pushes Jules down a huge ravine by surprise when she has her back turned and turns towards Jackie completely unaware (Jackie is still faking the 'in love' partner before this happens so Jules has no idea Jackie is a killer, thus nearly killing her after fall, but Jules survives this 30 meter fall on rocks. The film then proceeds to make sure Jules suffers every single minute by making her unable to outwit, outrun, outclass, outdo Jackie - Jackie is a force to be reckoned with, if seriously messed up. Jackie grewup hunting and this cabin were they lodge is her inherited cottage family home after her parents passed (though she probably killed them before)). She knows these woods like her backpocket, much to Jules disadvantage - Jules is nearly completely handicapped from the devastating fall, she has fractures, bones crushed, bruise all over, battered, weak, tired, shredded skin, in excrutiating pain, trembling, falling, struggling, bleeds from everywhere. Both actress are phenomenal in their acting, so incredibly real and terrifying at certain points. Brittany Allen steals the show as she is terrified of her ordeal and in extreme agony, predator vs prey - specifically, Predatress and she makes up for any female gender antagonist stereotype of 'not mean enough, Jackie is evil incarnate; any moment Jules could be one of these dead women, as Jackie relentlessly pursues her like a serialkiller stalking its victim for miles - she is like on one of her bear hunts. Jackie realises Jules survived, something that was not in her 'murder plotting' plan nor suppose to happen (she threw off other women before Jules from that cliff probably and none survived). At one point, Jules asks Jackie ''...Why?.....". But, we understand that Jackie has been doing this non-stop, serial killing, and gotten away with it each time because she erased any trace/she always made it look like an accident 'faking it' in her 'crying act' while calling the police (police was never suspicious of her, just accepted Jackie's fake charade 'my wife fell from a cliff... I'm so sad__' screaming, panting, sobbing, sniffing and all - her Act is convincing - police fell for it each time (they had no reason to suspect her because Jackie carefully erased any evidence that would lead to think of her being the one who killed her partner))). Jackie is doing this because her sanity, integrity, morality and human compassion are vanished, all that is left is a cold calculating manipulative empty shell, soulless. She is a monster, purest form with no more conscience but a simple thrill to kill. Murdering her innocent woman partners. When she looks herself in the mirror she likes what she sees, a vile foul thing with pretty face looks and a lust for blood. I think it is interesting that the director chose a lesbian couple, it created a surreal and new vision, we don't see that often - especially a gay women couple who are at each others figurative throat. I learned that Jackie's antagonist role was supposed to be a man, but the male actor was not available due to contract schedule incompatibility. Thus, it was a woman that was chosen instead, though I'm sure the role may have been somewhat updated/rewritten to reflect this change. Because, a regular a man assuming Jackie's role would not have been the same dynamic; a regular 'man chases woman' hetero couple would have been more bland, cliché and 'déjà vu'. The gay women couple dynamic changes the whole film, bringing a fresh new perspective (outside the festival I saw real gay women attend the film, many lesbian couple there went to see it. Gay or not, Hetero or not, this film breaks many clichés and stereotypes, and any gender can like it, any sexual orientation too, it breaks grounds and is not 'the token lesbian couple' stereotype film).
This film has strong Alfred Hitchcock's Pyscho film vibe and is inspired by it. The sound (terrifying/pulse pounding deep musical sound design - crisp powerful SFXs foley, we feel right there 'stuck in the middle') and cinematography (vistas, professional Alfred Hitchcock cinematography and camera angles (there is a scene where Jules is murdered in the attic but we see it from under the ceiling, the camera tensely follows their sttruggle while looking at the ceiling and the bangings sounds of them running, screaming, falling..), are truly great and elevate this opus to some of the best cinema craft.
All in all, very surprised, so simple story yet masterfully executed, some of the best Canadian horror thriller. solid 9/10.
Alien: Covenant (2017)
Ridley, here, no Ripley, but still Ridley. Scott. 8/10
Hi !
1979 to 2017 - Alien - to - Alien Covenant. The master who started it all is back : Ridley Scott. I just saw this tonight and I am quite satisfied; I'll be honest, I put my expectation bar so high that I was slightly deceived (I had seen the 6.8 score before going in, but thought that was harsh; but it turns out there is some truth to the criticism this time (I don't really follow critics, it's just someone's/people's opinion(s) which I respect - though if Many people give about the same score - it does give me an 'overall' feel of how I will feel (generally I add 2 points extra on critics)); and generally, it's a good 'barometer' about how 'most' people feel about the film. No one person responds the same to a film, but if a majority gives the same score (almost the same on multiple sites and off sites (like magazines film reviews)); it tells me that indeed that's about the general public feel, and I could feel roughly the same (but, most of time, I end up liking it up far more than the public because I'm really 'easy'/I don't care as long as it is decent and it, generally, is (hence, why I always give 2-3 points extra on 10 than the rest. It's impressive you know this is Mr.Scott's film, because he made the Alien 1979, Not only that he made 'horror films' become what they are today (for Many Many films have been inspired by Alien 1, not just in horror, but in thrillers and suspense's. Thanks to him. And Mr. Giger (the original inventor of the Alien creature (from his own dreams/nightmares; and all the 'Alien' art concepts he drew)). Story : A crew of about 10 people are on their way to a planet and carry 2000 colonizers 'asleep' (hypersleep), but during space travel (on a space ship) they encounter a very 'earth-like' planet that is very 'bio' compatible and 'biolively' (on it, there grows 'wheat'/the settlers grew and cultivated wheat fields on it and there is oxygen, water, etc (like Earth)). We have some good actors such as the Captain (Danny McBride) and the young woman whom she talks with often. They obviously go to that planet (after a talk between her and him). In fact, Mr.Scott does not spare the Captain's life - he kills him. I was a bit shocked by that.. but that is what Movie Magic/Power is about; your audience can be angry that you kill an important character to them that they wanted to 'live'... as a director/directors, it's your job and you decide where you lead your audience; not the other way around. I respect Mr.Scott's decision to end the Captain (whom was one of the best one on this film, Mr.McBride is the most natural one here - only
Mr.Fassbender equals him and the young woman (and also, that early woman whom gets stuck in the room when one of the crew members is infected and an Alien rips out of his back). There is one problem : Alien 2017 vs Alien 1979; The 1979 version had a Strong Female Heroine (Sigourney Weaver (whom carried the film all by herself/on her shoulders and made a huge difference, there was a crew too but it's impact was much less - Mrs.Weaver (Helen Ripley) was The Protagonist of the film - we understood that, the other characters did not steal her limelight) - not this time, now for the 2017 version we have a 'crew' of mostly 'nobodies' and everyone is trying to steal the other's 'fame'.Other great things : The Aliens in this film are incredible - they are 'Protomorphs' (white body form and protracted head) rather than Xenomorphs (the evolved crawling humanoid black body form). Problems : - Film suffers from Alien 2 problem, it's more 'actiony' than scary - and it had a PG-13 Rating (to get more (younger) viewers and thus, more money for film distributor 20th Century FOX and Mr.Scott's own company); As such, yes it is a horror film like Alien 1 - but it - Does Not - compare in terms of sheer terror than Alien 1 did. Alien 1 was terrifying - because it pitted a Single Woman (Mrs.Weaver/Ripley) against a Xenomorph Alien - in an abandoned derelict Spaceship. The Good: - VFX are Absolutely Spectacular (but with MPC/Frame store VFX, we always know it will be Top Notch (obviously, this film has an immense 100+Million dollar budget and it shows) -The New Aliens are cool but are quite infrequent actually and though, they are a bit 'Deja Vu' - they are still pretty frightening. IT's just the Mr.Scott does not do like his Alien 1 did : Make Real Suspense - that scares ...now the Aliens are basically 'Shown' full frontal...so no, monsters, don't scare people - Darkness, Fear, Psychosis, Loneliness, gallons fluid, etc...these elements scare people...not a 'big monster'...that doesn't work. In this Alien, the Aliens are not that much hidden and in 'plain sight', sometimes daily...so yeah, the fear factor is reduced to 0.Still, in the end, I give a solid 8.5/10. Mr.Scott please don't stop, you're still alive and can make so more movies - make a new Prometheus 2 or Alien: Covenant 2 and make it even better; this was just a warm-up from the long 'rusted time' since 1979... Alien: Covenant 2020 (perfect timing for 2020). I see it already.
Life (2017)
Great Space Scifi. 8/10.
Hey ! Just saw this tonight too, I was greatly surprised by this film - I wasn't sure what to expect really;at first I thought it was just going to be about space astronauts sort 'hanging around' and surviving in a soon-derelict space station and finding cellular life - and that's it...but it turned out cooler - it became a sci-fi critter feature/Creature Feature... that life form they find, at first looks so cute/so pretty/so nice and unhostile...but then the film takes a drastic turn and shows the nastiness of Mother Nature..that Martian life form mutates into one a kind creature (like a transparent fleshy translucent-like flower or octopus or sea star...that little 'wraps' around everything and sucks their life-force - until it's clear this thing because a man-eating creature that needs food, oxygen, etc and becomes extremely powerful.... One the most horrible scene is the by Rory (one of the American Astronauts) who gets stuck with the Martian creature and it gets to enter his body by his getting in by his mouth,then it literally kills him from inside - munching him from inside and we see his body float in the dead-space (like when you see astronauts float by lack of gravity)...then we see blood spill from his mouth and it becomes literally a fountain of blood as he dies and 'floats' in this deadly silence while the creature his munching him inside... one of the most scary tense scene. The story is quite rapid and you guessed it surely : Astronauts - in space (whereelse) - who are in a space station (but of course) orbiting over the Earth - and do Astronauty things (right)...not Astro-Naughty things...although they might since some their actions (mostly errors) cost them dearly (but for the most part they never make any errors...it's just this life force as entered in the space station...just like Alien in Alien 1); so as said, they Begin doing experiment son a flagella cell they found on Mars - they reanimate it and Prove that Mars had life... but this little cell Grows Fast into a full huge organisms...until it's the size of a finger...then it starts to look like a translucent jello-ish flower octopus with flapping tentacles-like that extremely stretchy and 'clinging/choking', like tentacles wrapping themselves around anything...this thing wants to 'wrap itself' around the British scientist who handles it - until it does but its power becomes so strong that it can crack bones...so you can understand what happens it literally crushes his hand to bits...and gets to escape out of the containment room... then it becomes an alarm and hysteria as the crew members are terrified and Rory is killed by this same creature...which escapes and 'roams' around the station's ventilation or holes... hiding...like Alien (in Alien 1)...it is an homage to Alien obviously.. It's pretty freaky and the body count rises, that Martian creature is so powerful and unkillable and Extremely Intelligent - it literally can outwit the entire team... Great actors; Ryan Reynolds, Jake Gylenhall, and a few others...all convincing. Characterization is OK, not deepest though but sufficient and since it's a small crew, we get attached to most everyone.
And when someone does die, it is rather scary and 'like a loss for the entire cosmonaut team', you feel like their Doom is impending - they are stuck in space and are less than 10 people... everyone counts... for their survival. The film's ending Surprised me - in a great way - I won't spoil it but it finishes in a Way that is Different and Adds a Realistic Change, to the endings we always see. The film has also a touch of philosophy, ethically and moments of character drama with deep self-questioning.. thus it gets a little deeper. Great Sci-Fi Horror Thriller Space Astronaut 'Scientific' Movie (like the film 'The Martian' a bit by Mr.Scott but with more sci-fi/thrill/horror/biological mutant martian creature in it) - Loved it. 8.5/10.
Kong: Skull Island (2017)
The King is back, long live the Kong..uh King. 8/10.
Hi there !
Just saw Kong-King the King Kang Kong - Himself; on Skull Island, also called SKong Island, SKung Island, Sking-Skang-Skung Island; or Skunk Island for short. And let me tell you, this is no skunk-er, quite a few times (just in my case) I don't agree with reviews, King Kong = Hollywood. Hollywood = King Kong. Do you see the ''elephant'' in the room, it's not an elephant - it's King Kong. I prefer protecting King Kong or Donkey Kong or whatever King or Kong that comes by - even a tiny one called Caesar (War of the Planet of the Apes); not attacking like savage bloodthirsty animal humans who want to 'put down' a 'monkey dog'... like the (dog) monkey it is... That's why I watch Hollywood movies. And you may call me a feeble-minded sheep/sheep id*ot but that wouldn't change anything; Hollywood or whatever you want to call it - these films have procured much joy over decades - something none of your complaining and critiquing/criticizing has ever done (except enlighten me on 'how you want to enlighten me'). With that said and off my chest (like King Kong beating his chest in a alpha-macho-testero way - I got that out): I will give my feelings about this film briefly in bullet points since I'm running out of space to make a real review : *Extremely High Budget *Character Depth was not deep though *Great variety of mega-huge critters *Every monster big, even the dinosaur skeletons because this Island and everything on it is Prehistoric (and Prehistoric 'dinosaur sized') *VFX are absolutely Breathtaking *Not as good as King Kong 2005 (Peter Jackson) *This King Kong is less nuanced but still nuanced enough in terms of emotions - he is far most 'beast/monster-like' than the 2005 version where there he looked Extremely nuanced and like a Real Animal (in fact in the 2005 version he looked a True Gorilla (the whole body and posture as quadruped on all 4), while now he's standing up as a biped and looks far more like Chimpanzee/Gorilla Antropomorphic Hybrid - looks like a standing hairy human with a gorilla face and looks far more like the 1930s version; his fur his face his body etc look much more the Original 1930 Version ( while the 2005 version he looked far more lie a Real MEga-Huge Gorilla). I read that in this film is Far Bigger than the 2005 version; he measures almost 300 feet tall in this film while in the 2005 version he measures about 50 or so feet tops. So, yeah, this King Kong - is Scary Big...and would make Mince Meat out Peter Jackson's version simply by being about 10 times bigger. *Samuel El Jackson the ell Jackson himself the best in this, John Goodman always good (of course, his name is Goodman), a couple of new comers (Forgot his name but he's Loki (now I remember, Tom Hiddleston)...the guide that is very popular actor right now also good too). Characters are just not deepened so whether they perish or not makes not that much difference (everyone is disposable) although the woman photographer (Brie Larson) is also great and kind of puts some characterization in this. King Kong doesn't need to be characterized - he Is a Character himself. Also there is the actor that plays the ww2 veteran that was stuck on the island since crashing on it 28 years ago (from 1973), always a fun actor. *The story rapidly : researchers find a lost island that is thought of as a hoax and that could house things unknown there; they go in with the military (1970s Apaches used in Vietnam war..BTW there is lots great 70s Rock music in the film - that was a truly nice touch) and find more than what they bargained for - they come face to face with f...ng huge Gorilla Monkey Standing Tall in front of them as they fly over the amazing islands (this was shot in Thailand or some very foreign closed-in area with the sea and mountains/huge Arphipelagos lying above the water - you know exactly like the ones you see on tourists post-cards - Picturesque, truly beautiful and breathtaking imagery). You kind of know what happens next : Kong is not pleased by these uninvited guests who shoot at him first - he bashes one helicopter after the other (like 8 of them for an early tally of 50 dead) and there's just one left : Samuel and the gang... on the island they will hunt..the mtfkr...but sadly there is hostile all around, nasty beasts like the Huge Lizards... Again the VFX are 100% quality and elevate this a lot - the camera angles are powerful and so is the sound, we hear King Kong's Roaring and Alpha-Male Chest-Beating in his Tantrums... The facial motion capture animation on the face of King Kong is breathtaking and you feel this is one Mean Monkey Gorilla who you do not want f...with. So, to finalize, loved it - it was not perfect OK and it did not the exact soul or feeling of Peter Jackson's 2005 version but Both stand as the Best ones - on their own and in their Own way - differently and that'sa great thing. Love em both. Both are entertaining and have their peculiarities; and stand Tall, like Kong himself and Own self, as their own. I give a solid and final 8/10.
Resident Evil: The Final Chapter (2016)
A Decent Resident Evil Conclusion - 75%.
Hi,
I got to see this earlier today at the theater...right from the start I put my hopes and expectations bar at the lowest level so I wouldn't be so disappointed. Resident Evil is a good popcorn movie with potential and a large budget (very evident) but it also suffers from serious problems that make it seem much less than it could be. (I'm Resident Evil fan/been playing it since the RE1 1996 on PSX) or characters. I don't take it badly that the Resident Evil films take creative artistic liberties. The camera suffers from the 'amateur shaky cam' look, in every scene where there is movement or action; the action becomes condensed into very rapid quick cuts to illustrate the 'quickness' and create an effect of 'urgency'; like Mrs.Jovovich attacking someone is shown in ultra-fast cuts in a split-second so we can't make anything of what we see; it's just a blur of quick-cuts that are very jarring and 'saccade-like' very rapidly; it does create a great effect of 'speedyness' and increases the power of the action - true; but it's So Fast that we just can't see anything - and this is at least 50% of the film, that's a large chunk of film that is completely visually obscured. As it is it looks a MTV music video by someone who does not know how to hold a camera (very shaky and wild camera - so much you can actually feel sick/want to barf...that much the camera keeps on zigzagging madly and trembling all over the place on top of the fact that the action sequences at sped up at 15 frames/second (rather than 24 fps cinema standard)..it Looks Ultra Sped Up and Blurry Shaky Mess - in 1 second you can see almost 5 Quick Cuts of a fast action movement, that's how fast it is and how headache-inducing/stomach churning/nauseous it can be). The image itself is beautiful and with a deep constant/rich colors. The sound design is fitting and adequate; but it was not incredible either but it did the job for sure. The actors do a good job overall, Mrs.Jovovich is the best as always, and tries her best to make this final chapter better than it appears. Mrs.Larter (Claire Redfield) is back and that's a plus. The other actors are good but very underdeveloped - many get killed rapidly (thus we don't care much for their fate). Dr.Isaac and Albert Wesker are also nice, Dr.Isaac the Umbrella boss is definitely the best antagonist and does his best to inject some villain touch. The little girl who We get a final ending where Mrs.Jovovich learns she is a clone and sees her real self (old person who has progeria) and blows up the Hive (underground Umbrella complex). the effects are truly good and we have a solid bunch of monsters : Cerberus (scary looking undead dogs), zombies, a mutated Hulk zombie, some other creatures like the nasty looking flying CG devil at the start of the film. The film is not scary but tense with some more gorier/bloody moments, But as an action-horror film it really great and does the job, it's a good ride/exhilarating fun... The film does not end (she finds out about her past through flashbacks and feels liberated to finally know her origin) and Mrs.Jovovich rides on into the sunset on her bike after killing all the last zombies with the T-virus, we know there is going to be another one after this/or let's say the door is open for her (Resident Evil is a franchise that makes millions as such it would be doubtful they stop it; just like Batman or Spiderman or James Bond or Star Wars or Star Trek..., they are Established Franchises since Decades, that have spawn countless sequels (Batman has what 50-some 'Batman' films since the 1960s...it's a story that doesn't die) and from the immense money they make- Resident Evil will come back - it is almost Assured. All in all, it was alright and I did have fun watching it (the most important point) as an action film. I just wished it would have been less action-like (but that is what 'sells'), and more scary/horror-like (there was nothing scary in this film except certain gory images from the monster zombie/mutated creatures and the blood splashing by times...but you need atmosphere to scare, any atmosphere was killed by quick cuts, shaky cam, exaggerated action moves (a woman who kills 50 men in a split second quick cuts, nobody 'buys it'), bad enemies (the enemies shoot at her and can't even touch her with a Gatling gun, that's how poor at aiming they are) and an action-like sound score that kills the frightful-mood to make it a upbeat action flick). Resident Evil 1 game, at the source was a Survival Horror Game, a Terrifying one where the characters did not have endless ammo or big guns (like in the films), they struggles (although Mrs.Jovovich does struggle and is a redeeming character, it's just she is endowed with excessive powers (fighting like a Ninja and beating chumps like it's nothing!), also she gets beaten like a pulp yet she gets back up like it's nothing with some scratches (realism is low)...the Resident EVil films franchise completely departed from the Realism/Terror in the games (just like the game Resident Evil 4 became an action game, it then copied on from that particular game, while the first film was much more like Resident Evil 1 - it featured a very scary mansion where the game's lore starts)...So I would say the best films in the franchise are, in order : Resident Evil 1, 2, 3, 4 and this last one. From the forth on it becomes worse, but this one saves the franchise and is better than the last one. Still better/better production value than other horror/action crap-like films that do come out...I give a solid 7.5/10.
Le scaphandrier (2015)
Little QC horror gem.
Hi there,
I saw this film a little while ago and wanted to share my review of it. It is a great film as an indie-budget horror (a Canadian film/French Canadian Quebec film/Québécois indie film d'horreur, it is very rare to see good (or any fiction genre thereof) horror movies come from very low budget Canadian and Quebec productions (French or even English ones), it really is a low hanging fruit in the fruit(ion) tree of the Canadian Cinema Industry (and in this precise case of the French Quebecer Cinema Industry that has a boom lately, but still most of the films made in Quebec are dramas, dramas, dramas and more dramas (why so dramatic lol!); and comedies by the thousands (at least we can laugh)... barely action/thriller/horror films are made (that is left for UK/US productions who have the cash) and that's because of small capital available (not enough financial budget to make them even if Quebec offers strong tax-incentives for filmmakers to do films here, Ontario, Alberta and BC make much more fictions because US/UK always end up in Toronto/Vancouver (and have more money too and because of language facility/language in English in Ontario, still Montreal is bilingual and Quebec city is a gem to shoot in so it should not be such a strong linguistic barrier but permeable for foreigners who don't speak french) but Quebec is sadly lackluster in that Fiction films department (because fictions cost of millions of dollars and most QC films are below 5 millions $ CAD). At least, it releases many French language drama world-quality chef-d'oeuvres that end up at Academy Awards (Xavier Dolan's films, or Denis Villeneuve's films)).
Here we have film by unknown director Alain Vézina (but who cares sometimes the best gems are hidden) who crafts a nice little gem of horror. It's a story of Scaphander 'revenant' like a ghost costumed in a 19th century big underwater metal scaphander suit that comes to haunt the people in a very small QC coastal village. The gore and the horror factor is nicely done and tight, so is the acting. The Scaphander man is scary and walks at night to scare the hell of the people and kill all the villagers. It has a quality of a high budget horror film yet it doesn't have the budget/a low-budget production (very impressive!).
There is the actor Raymond Bouchard who plays a captain on a ship and tells of the lore/the story of a 'Scaphander-suited man', told from ancient mariners, who dwelled at the bottom of the waters around there for almost 2 centuries, and would 'rise' at night from the depths to kill anything like a plague (sort of like the Marsh's Monster (Le Monstre du Marais/Marécage/The Mummy/Pit Monster/Blue Lagoon monster/Monstre du lagon bleu...or basically, the Lockness Monster which has proved has a fake hoax (a man swimming a faking a monster underwater like a 'fake shark finn' circling the water)).
I was pleased and like it (not just because it's a French movie but because, unlike other french Quebecer Fiction films, this one definitely hit the right notes to create a solid popcorn horror movie on a very low budget which is commendable). I recommend it for horror lovers, it's quaint and small in 'scale' but it makes up, it has heart/a little indie gem. I hope more QC/Canadian horror films will come out, it just a very unfunded area of Cineman of the Canadian cinema industry (and that's because it's fiction and sadly, for many producers : fiction = cheap thrills/low IQ films...what sadness...films have always been about entertaining just like telling stories around a camp fire...).
A solid 8 out of 10.
5150, rue des Ormes (2009)
Great Canadian QC Horror/best one in 10 y.
Hi!
I know I'm really late late with this one but I dugg it up from the past (2009) and wished to tell you about it. Here we have a film called 5150 Rue des Ormes (5150 Elm's Street/Way), it's a great (one of the best ones and very few ones that were actually made/and that were, actually, great, too) a Canadian QC french Quebecer thriller/suspense with strong horror elements (such as when later on in the film they play Cadaver Chess, literally the young protagonist plays a macabre chess game in the antagonist's father's lair of doom/the basement garage with actual dead cadaver bodies representing each human-sized chess piece on the huge makeshift floor-sized chessboard. We understand all the cadavers are the father's former kills/random people passing by on the Des Ormes street in front of the house that he lured in his cult house/his basement pit of hell) The story is straightforward (spoilers ahead) and revolves around a young man Yannick Bérubé (actor Éric Grondin who excels and is truly an incredible young actor, poignant and very deep/serious/natural in his acting), he is a university student that has a sort of university-essay on photography, and thus he must take pictures as a work-course assignment.
He goes on a bike ride, and a certain point he turns on the street Des Ormes, takes some shots, and goes up in front of the 5150 house... and accident happens and he falls off his bicycle rendering it totalled and useless; he is stranded there and a bit hurt and goes for help at the first house in sight : 5150 des Ormes House... the Wrong house... he should never gone into... An old man (Mr. Beaulieu, Normand d'Amour/Incredible Actor here just as good as Mr. Grondin) a deranged crazed man who very pious and religious/almost a zealot and is house is a religious Cult; and he's the Cult leader) he emerges from the house and sees what happens/the commotion, young Mr. Bérubé asks help from old Mr. Beaulieu whoms decides 'ok' to let him in and to tend to his wound/call for help/ambulance/police... as Mr. Bérubé gets in the house, he knows something is 'weird' and 'off'... this family is many weirdos who though nice for accepting him and helping him - will Capture him/Abduct him, Mr. Beaulieu kidnaps him and in a struggle, totting a 12-gauge shotgun he forces him into a vacant room on the last upper floor... it's a very closed-in room, no windows, evertthing is closed-in... Mr. Bérubé screams in fear and in help! Bangs on the walls... he is captured... days will go will go on like that... he will be fed sporadically and Mr. Bérubé and him will developp a sort love/hate relationship (being that the food he gets is his only way to survive and 'sort of' forgive Mr. Beaulieu for abducting him/sequestering him and torturing him... at certain points in the film Mr. Bérubé tries to escape and fails each time, as Mr. Beaulieu is just too strong, authoritarian... and puts him back in the room/cage-in... trapped forever) Mr. Bérubé feels he will die there... and slowly perishes and goes into comatose/psychosis... it becomes very bloody, a nightmare.) The other actors are great too such as the Mother (just as crazy as Mr. Beaulieu) and the Daughter (Sonia Vachon).. both completely indoctrinated and brain-washed, they defend the Father (Mr. Beaulieu), and punish Mr. Bérubé any chance they get. But a certain point, the Mother gets really overwhelmed and starts to blame the Father, and will feel sad for Mr. Bérubé getting tortured for nothing, she will try to help him escape sort of... Mr. Bérubé is forced to play chess games with Mr. Beaulieu, Mr. Beaulieu makes a deal with him : 'if you beat me at a chess game - you will be freed'... and so it becomes a big mind-game between them, back and fort they play chess games and Mr. Bérubé fails each time as Mr. Beaulieu is just so good that each chess game lost enrages Mr. Bérubé - but... with time and losses, he becomes better and Mr. Beaulieu is feeling that he - Might - lose. To a certain point, where it's the last showdown... everyone is dead except Mr. Beaulieu and Mr. Bérubé... Mr. Beaulieu forces Mr. Bérubé totally naked to go down the garage lair to see the cadavers and play a big cadaver chess game - one last one and then kill Mr. Bérubé or himself or both... Mr. Bérubé finally wins the chess game and what ensues is truly scary, he finally evades Mr. Beaulieu's clutch...
In the film, Mr. Beaulieu says a very freaky line : "Les Non-Justes doivent mourir" (Non-Justs must die), basically he is inferring that any person he lures, catches, abducts, trapps-in and then kills... is a 'Non-Juste' someone Un-Righteous deserving to die, someone that is a Sinner (going against God as such an Unrigteous Sinner who must pay for sinning and being Unjust/Unlawful of the Laws of God).. being a Hyper-Religious Pious person he sees Mr. Bérubé like some kid student who deserves to die for the simple fact he is not religious/pious and thus, a sinner/heathen/agnostic/atheist...As such he kills in cold blood a family that goes to and calls them 'Non-Justes...'... is daughter is with him and partakes as complicit murderer...
Well safe to say this horror/thriller/suspense at the best quality and can give you nightmares! Especially you won't look at chess board the same way anymore!
Playing 'meat chess' is quite disconcerting specially if you know that you lose the chess match - you die...A Great Canadian QC horror film, one of the Best ones in the last 10 years with solid production budget, if only there were more of them made.
A give a solid 8 on 10!
Assassin's Creed (2016)
Excellent Ubisoft adaptation ! 9/10.
Hey what's up !
Just saw this and wished to share my POV. I have been a Huge Fan of Assassin's Creed Games by Ubisoft (in fact I was supposed to work on them as I applied to work at Ubisoft Montréal many times to no avail..and would have worked on the great Assassin's Creed (a Canadian Montreal Games Franchise of Montreal Ubisoft). Still, no regrets, I loved this film - was SUPER COOL - the camera angles...WoWwwW...the camera angles are friggin-tastic...the camera does powerful sweeping movements over Spain Andalusia in 1492...it's so beautiful and somptuous (very value), Michael Fassbender plays a convict who is put down (lethal injection) and loses his former life, but he is revived and is forced to be used as a guinea pig at the Assassin's Creed Technological/Templars Complex. He must enter in a machine (called Animus), who plugs him with 'his past ancestor's DNA 500 years ago in Spain', when he is 'in synch' whatever movemetns he does in the present are transposed in the past, or vice versa. It's incredible camera work and the VFX CG are so well made; so are the costumes and sets - the Spanish inquisition of 1492 is deathly scary, we assist heretics burning at the stakes and Morion/Spanish conquistador armies fight...the search for a sphere that is said to contain the 'first germ of evilness in humans'...and the religious clergy keeps it tight as back in 1490s..it is the Muslim Moors (the Arabs who invaded Spain in 15th century) who hold it and at a certain point in the film; let's say Mr.Fassbender gets to Assassinate more then a few evil Templar people with many acrobatic moves and jumping/climbing all over the place - as said, the camera work is breathtakingly dynamic and powerful, we fell 'litterally floating' with the 'flying' assassins over Renaissance Spain. Marion Cotillard who helms the whole thing is good (if slightly too rigid/almost fazed-out/stone in her acting), but who's really good (as always) is Mr.Iron (Marion's Father), who plays the Complex Boss and who lies to his daugther and tells her the family is the Templars/Templiers (the rivals of the Assassins who for centuries have fought them to protect order). Exhilarating camera moves make this eye-candy and a like a extra-fun ride non-stop 'in a roller coaster'. The musis is great too, tons of upbeat music and scary deep atmospheric heroic music; excellent soundwork. Mr.Fassbender steals the show and is definitely the best acting one here (he is in the best actors when he puts all of himself in his acting, and he does so, especially playing his 'assassin' in the past - he is so solemn/silent...like silent deadly assassin).
Great - Loved It, Ubisoft keep on making games, and movies (since many video game adaption movies don't fare well, this one does) !
I give a great 9/10 (worth much more than measly 6.4).
Split (2016)
Funny Unintentionnaly but still solid/good! 8/10.
Hey there !
Just saw this tonight, and let me say, I am speechless, I don't know how to say it... truthfully I have difficulty sizing this film and I don't mean it in the wrong way; it has great potential and production quality. James McAvoy (if it could be anybody, he can do it better than any actor) is absolutely brilliant as the utterly insane madman with 25 split personalities - he's just outstanding in his shifting multi-layered multi-personalities TDI display : he evens plays a woman, he plays a 9 year old, he plays a killer abudctor, he plays a homosexual man, he plays 'the beast' (an enraged Hulk monster), etc... with brio and clear distinction...This is both good and bad (only for me)...I will try to explain : this film wants to be very 'serious' and about split personality people and self-mutilating people who suffer from serious mental problems. The problem is when he shifts to another 'persona/character' mid conversation...it may seem a bit jarring (for me it was a little) or let's say it made me laugh so much !!! Very Unintentionally ! (I feel guilty about it), Here is the movie trying to be Very serious about 3 young teenager ladies who are abducted by a crazy psycho murderer with dozens of personalities and brought into his psycho lair...and I'm laughing non-stop at the ridiculness of the 'different 'wacky' personalities' (more wacky/funny than psychotic)...I felt bad because there were very tense and scary moments where you feel sad/scared for the young girls who are terrified and trapped.... but then...Mr.McAvoy comes in the room and makes a big fool of himself with ultra-funny (unintentionnaly) performances of a 9 year old, of a very tender woman and then switches to a extravagant homosexual man...etc...huh!!??? lol..then...he switches to a Super Mean Killer Face... LOL...Oh that must be the Killer Personality Deciding to Come Out ! Lol (I'm really not laughing at him/or the movie, it's great quality with incredible performances of everyones including Mr.McAvoy's old lady shrink..just 'the unintentional effect' of his facial personality performances)....a nd there the young girls stare at him in utter fright (veryyy seriousss) while I'm literally cracked up laughing inside (lol)...(not at the girls' sad plight...but at the Multi-personality split personality performances of abductor Mr.McAvoy). The point I'm trying to say is this film is truly great but the unintentional effect of shifting personalities renders it 'funny' (in some points) rather than serious. Because Mr.McAvoy is so good at it he displays tons of slightly shifting nuances in his faces (crooked eyebrows/arched muscles/tons of expressions..) but it's also quite awkward (again it makes you laugh! sometimes it's slighty cringe-worthy), the film wants to be Extra-Serious, but because of that, it becomes tame and even funny (sadly unintentionnaly because of the 'comic' relief in the 'comical' personality he acts with the other 'dark' ones...I mean it's a grown man playing a 9 year old extremely well..but you know...it's an Adult Man..and he's playing a cute funny innocent 9 year old..yeah it will be awkward and end up funny/ridiculous rather than 'serious tone'). The main teenager woman in this film is Truly great, she is an upcoming actress with incredible potential (actress Anya-Taylor Joy, she played the young teenager blond in the great horror film 'The Witch (2016)', she is the brightest in the bunch/the most serious (she was a child that was molested (we see flashbacks of her past) and became a 'rebel recluse self-mutilating teenager' and will be the only one who survives), the film doesn't 'end' per say and Mr.McAvoy is not killed he survives two shotgun blasts from her (as the beast personality he comes a Hulk and his veins pop, he can literally split a metal bar in two), the film ends with cameo from Bruce Willis as Dunn his former psychotic/asylum caregiver...we understand Bruce Willis and Mr.McAvoy will come back in Split 2.
All in all very awkwardly surprised (if I want to good laughing psychosis therapy by Mr.McAvoy it does well, Mr. M.Night Shyamalan (the director) is truly something and keeps on creating very special and different films), stil don't let my weird review put it down, it is a definitely a good film nonetheless : 8 out of 10.
She Who Must Burn (2015)
Great Canadian political-horror film ! Best one in 10 y.
Hey !
I watched this film at Fantasia Festival 2015 and was absolutely blown away. This is one of the best English Canadian horror films in the last decade made by a legendary Canadian 80s+-year old filmmaker whom I spoke to while the after movie presentation/he was answering audience questions. I told him : ''Wow Congrats, this film has such deep seriousness and mature/adult content...it's terrifying, brilliant, it deals with real heavy deep subject matter such as religion, atheism, abortion, science, biology, women's rights/freedoms, religious fanaticism/cults, psychologically horrific violence and death...''. He was very flattered! This film is not for the faint of heart because it deals with very adult R-18 serious psychological matter, especially for women watching this, you are cautioned to not watch this, if you feel insulted/can't take violent images pertaining to pregnancy/abortion/religion/atheism/pro-death/pro-life. It's a quite political/a big politic-religious-science motive powder keg covered in a terrorizing and bloody masterfully-orchestrated horror package (by a master legend director no less, and it shows; he's the Stanley Kubrick, Martin Scorcese or Ridley Scott of Canada if even better).
The story is truly modern and 'old' as the times, it is about the rights of women to choose what to do with their bodies (as such there is a good dose/a hint of feminism in this film, it's not against it or to its disadvantage, it helps it in this case and is not so ''Preachy'' in its political message; yet there is one and it's very clear (some might call it a hidden feministic agenda, perhaps...still this is a Man/Male director so let's not forget that too; I think he was very sensible in his approach and doesn't lather on about it but makes a point). The film revolves around a young woman (a couple) who runs a fertility/abortion clinic in a secluded area in Canada where a couple religious/pious people hear about that clinic and are hellbent (litterally like demons) are making sure she Dies for it. Because they are pro-life (against abortion, saying it tantamount to murder thus see her as 'baby/human murderer') and she is con-life (for abortion and makes the procedures); the films is axed on the religious cult insane zealots who chant religious songs of 'putting her to death because God said so since she is a Sinner for killing unborn children'... it's a struggle because they play nice but keep on harassing her (almost like stalking her everywhere and sexual harassment), and harassing her at the clinic...her boyfriend/husband tries his best to protect and recon-fort her/confront the crazies...but sadly he gets attacked viciously by the local religious pro-life backwoods rednecks...it's sad to see...she then basically absolutely alone in this fighting against these people and sadly, again, they capture her and beat to a bloody face...and then put her to death by burning her alive at the stake/tree...we watch her in a lengthy excruciating deadly sequence burn to death and scream in agony....the huge devil-like flames broiling her flesh...it truly is terrifying R-18 stuff as said...as the zealots look at her burn (''She Who Must Burn''...)..and smile almost chanting ''The Devil Witch is Burning...Burn! Burn in Hell Burn! B*tch.. Die Btch..Die...'' Very freaky and scary...you almost want to rip their hearts out and lop their heads off how much they are despicable evil monstrosities. The films ends there. We here the Thunder....as if God spoke...is verdict : Death.
It truly is a blend of forces of religion/past ways vs atheism/science/new ways. It is saying : yes a fetus is a life, but bringing a human to life and making misery to it - is not a life it's a condemnation - or basically death itself. As such adoption should always be the choice of women not from religious people who want to enforce their 'view' of the act of abortion 'as murder'...they are no better - they killer her, they committed murder...sometimes I think we need a sort a justice to decide what is best about this - made with all women so they can decide (men can be there too, but obviously it's the woman's body that 'gives birth' so she has the final say - on what happens in her/with her body, including the life/child she carries - it is in - her - body, nobody elses but hers; as such, it is HER Right - alone, and again, no one elses because No One Else lives in Her but Her).
Great Canadian Film !
9/10.
Victor Frankenstein (2015)
Very Surprised in a Good Way. 9 out of 10.
Hi !
I really wanted to see this at the movie theaters, but sadly I never got around/had the time to go and see it; but I finally got to see it at home; Just wow...really impressed, I really thought it would be much milder and just 'ok'...it turned out to be much better than I thought and had envisioned from the trailer.
This story is simple and does not need telling, we all know it but briefly, it's about a man who discovers he can make 'life out of death' using electrical power (since all cells function by electrical current), and he does against the law in secrecy in his 'mad lab' by picking up leftover organ parts of dead cadaver animals rotting in a morgue/zoo and piecing them together to ultimately make a huge man 'Alive' called 'prometheus' (later on in the film, their ultimate goal). The film has a nice Macabre vibe to it and it's eerie and nice 'gothic/victorian' 19th century look. During his experiments he decides to go off to a circus and stumbles upon a man who plays a clown in the freak-show circus...an accident happens and they both, together, save a woman from death by doing a respiratory procedure (they both are physicians and 'doctors' of the anatomy, they know it by heart), Victor Frankenstein adopts that man and tells him he will become his partner in crime (since all his done in secrecy as there a British agent who's hellbent on capturing Mr.Frankenstein and Igor (the name given to the man Mr.Frankenstein adopts); that man suffers from a crooked back/hunched back due to a abscess (fluid/puss) and Mr.Frankenstein saves his life/gives him a new life in his home/lab.....together they will build fleshy organs/animals (their first try they show it at the British medical college, to prove that an animal (a sort of enraged monkey) can be created and made 'alive' (by electric shocks starting the heart to beat like a defibrillator); it turns out bad because that sutured- up monkey is killed by them when it turns hostile on them). Igor sees the acrobat woman he saved and admired/loves, they fall in love... Then comes the day where it is creation of Prometheus, the huge man/hunk of flesh using the thunder to animate it, it works but as we know it turns out to be a soul-less monstrosity that is hellbent on killing everything. Mr.Frankenstein then understands his Creations are soulless and thus pointless...
A great film...I was surprised there was such a great chemistry between Mr.Frankenstein and Igor...James McAvoy and Daniel Radcliffe are absolutely Great ! Mr.McAvoy does an incredible acting job, he's tempestuous and sure of himself, he trusts Igor with his life, he exudes great authority, genie, border-insanity and knowledge; Mr.Radcliffe does a nice job as the timid circus crooked clown and into a young man straight up who wants to create something in his life. The woman is also great. The British agent too, also, Mr.Frankenstein's rich young British rival (called Finnegan, Freddie Fox) that offers him to make Prometheus in his castle on a beach coast (that kills Igor by throwing him in the water to drown, but Igor survives), is also great. The CG VFX and prosthetic are incredible such as the monkey creature and Prometheus himself; the 19th century London sets are truly beautiful and beautifully constructed, live or CG set extensions. This is a very high production/budget value film and it show immensely. We even have a brief visit from Mr.Frankenstein's Father (the incredible actor Charles Dance) whom scolds him/slaps him by telling him he brings shame to the family name 'Frankenstein' for creating these science flesh monsters alive and that he wasted his life now...
All in all, a great movie that really surprised me, it's a touching story about wanting to accomplish your dreams and accomplishing the impossible (bringing a deal animal/carcass to life, making life out of death), it's a story of deep friendship (Mr.Frankenstein and Igor), and love (Igor and the beautiful intelligent acrobat woman whom tells him he must be careful and watch out for the missteps of Mr.Frankenstein and stand up to him if he's wrong/even if he is his friend, or that Mr.Frankenstein saved his life by liberating him from the freak-show circus (when Igor was trapped there)). Igor knows that and at a certain point (when both are seeked out by the police as outlaws) he has no choice but abandoned Mr.Frankenstein...but he comes back to save him at the castle from doing Prometheus. I really don't understand the very poor rating, it deserved so much more than 6.0...
Great film, absolutely loved it ! : 9 out of 10.
31 (2016)
Good, as a Mr.Zombie-style film.
Hi there !
This film is something : extreme depravity, intense gore, nazi and hillbilly chainsaw-totting clowns, psycho freaks, enraged midget nazi, sick game ball-costumed bourgeois, swearing, cussing (more f bombs than you can muster), racial tones (racism, blacks vs Hitler freaks), blood splashing by the gallons, a real uncomfortable nightmare come true, this is shocking Hardcore R-18 stuff. Not for the faint of heart or people who feel insulted easily.
But I was not surprised at all and expected no less from Gorror Gourru the Undead Zombie himself, the very creatively talented director Mr.Zombie (Rob Zombie). The only other one like him is Quentin Tarantino, both are masters of hardgore films; the difference being that Mr.Tarantino deals with real life violence in a more serious way/subject matter is more real and not an over-the-top horror fantasy, even if Mr.Tarantino's characters seem overtly self-aware cartoons of real people (while Mr.Zombie's main protagonist characters (not the cartoon antagonists like in this film (clowns, bourgeois, nazi midgets)) seem more real no matter how screwed up they are).
The intro is very disconcerting and awkward : a man stares straight in the camera for 15 minutes long while delivering a big speech (à la Mr.Tarantino) as if he's talking to us the audience, a bloodied face of a clown saying how he intends to make it quick. He says a pretty powerful line that will become a cult line... with a straight face and Coming from a face-painted clown (since clowns are suppose to make you make smile and laugh) :
''....I didn't come to make you happy or make your day.......I came to END YOUR LITTLE MISERABLE F...LIFE.''
That stuck in my head. As if that clown was talking to me. That was freaky scary.
The rest of the film centers around 5 or so characters who are abducted by all costumed psycho clowns into a secret bourgeois' lair to fend off against an onslaught of clown freakazoids in a sort of torture-porn/gore-porn 70s exploitation snuff film trashy way. It's a brutal survival in extreme violence and carnage, it had a very southern hillbilly rednecks 70s 'Texas Chainsaw Massacre' feel to it (Mr.Zombie emulates 70s look and the film itself is set in 1976's American Deep South).
The protagonists do a good acting job and are natural, the nazi midget's acting is good too, very freaky. As for the British bourgeois they're good too. The other clowns are too, but the best one is definitely the last one with the 2 pocket knives that the protagonists face (it's the same man clown that delivered the 15-min monologue at the intro of the film). Mrs.Zombie does a decent job (Sherri Moon Zombie, Mr.Zombie's wife that partakes as a collaboration in his films as an actress).
Sadly, the film is not up to par to Mr.Zombie other films. If you are easily insulted or offended, you are cautioned to not watch this or risk having nightmares. You already know what to expect
Still, it's a good film, as a Mr.Zombie film.
I give 7.5/10.
Cave (2016)
Nice Cave movie.
Hi !
First, I reveal some story twists, so spoilers ahead...
This film is a cave movie with potential (if not realizing it fully and failing/falling short a bit... but this film was made on a smaller budget, so we have to give it credit for accomplishing it with much less financial means and on a smaller production crew, just like with Indie foreign art films). The first thing you notice is the breathtaking imagery of the mountainous Norway scenery, the camera and the camera lens used in this film are truly high resolution : the image is very clear and the colors/contrast very deep and rich; this creates an image, to the eye, that is truly ''popping'' with camera depth of field; and thus immerses you-in/pulls you-in, it's eye candy. The story revolves around 3 friends, of war (former soldiers), getting back together and wanting to do something extreme together (cave spelunking). Their relationship dynamic is a couple with an ex boyfriend who later becomes jealous of his ex-girlfriend's current boyfriend, and wants to get back with his ex-girlfriend : the current boyfriend is in his way ... so he intends to kill him (and he will, he will kill him in the cave faking an accidental death, until it becomes clear to her that he is the murderer (drowned him and then, cracked his neck), she in turn will kill him out of vengeance for killing her current boyfriend). Sort of a discord love triangle at play.
The ex boyfriend watches sexual scenes of the couple making sex and fantasizes to get back with her. The rest of the film concentrates on them descending in the cave, it is exhilarating and thrilling, but not scary, just slightly tense. It has long drawn out moments of dead time that hinders its potential and some hand-held camera movements that hurt the lacking cinematography. The sound work is descent but nothing special, it's very mild in feeling like a light popcorn movie to watch on a Sunday evening with nothing to do, that could be more. The largest lackluster flaws : We can't even see their eyes in the cave, the cave is nice but some areas are bland, it's flat dull compared to the films The Cave/The Descent, the film drags on with sex scenes, we just can't ''connect'' enough to care of the characters' plight (whether they die or not makes no difference), the antagonism is quite low (besides the frustrated ex boyfriend), the cave almost seems inviting like a Tourist cave - it makes for a good Norway scenery pamphlet tourist ad. Still, there is potential if you don't go-in with extremely high hopes. A nice first cave opus for a young-able director.
I give a 7.5/10.
Robinson Crusoe (2016)
Underdog, 9.25 out of 10.
Hi, I was both happy (theater to myself) and sad/struck (nobody else (wants to?) came to watch it)) when I went to see this movie to realize there was absolutely no one in the room, but me. 1 person for a whole theater. I truly love full CGI movies, they are my favorites. And, I am not just talking about 'cartoons'/aimed-for-kids content CG movies, but more adult ones (there should be more of those but they don't fair well with audiences because of the uncanny valley problem and because the closer you get to reality, the less the 'it's CGI' it becomes; thus, it replicates reality so well, we can't detect it's CG; thus, it becomes a 'regular' filmed movie 'in reality' like every one else, with one major difference - the uncanny valley, humans' brain detects micro imperceptible things that just seem 'off' and immediately, then, know that it's CG and are 'put off' 'thrown off' 'taken aback' from the movie experience; it them becomes a jarring non-smooth/non-transparent viewing, because your brain reminds you each 5 seconds you are watching a CG movie - who truly wants to 'look real' but you know it isn't because you 'spotted the impostor' (you detected micro-things that are 'off' (made by computer) and it 'shows', it might be micro-stuff, thus not very big or that important since it's so small; but it's jarring for that reason, you can detect them - even if they are SO small, that's how powerful our eyes and brain is with this (our brain has been accustomed to viewing human faces, if one is slightly 'off' in realistic adult CG movie, game over - people smell the uncanny valley a 1000 miles ahead.). For this movie here, it's not important because it is in the vain of Pixar cartoon/for kids movies. They are not realistic 'adult' depiction of reality but a caricature 'cartoons' depiction of it. And that's OK. The farther you go away from the 'realistic look' combined with 'adult' content, the more you extinguish the uncanny valley effect. In this movie, they Want you to know it's CG; so it's both a good thing and a bad one. Good because it's a CG Animation movie (looks like a categorization effect), and a beautiful one at that; bad, because the same reason, it is categorization (pigeon holing/etiquette). I saw this movie and was dazzled...I don't understand the poor review and such low score; it definitely does not deserve such low score. It's true the jokes and the animation quality were not of the Pixar caliber; but we have to remember this is a smaller production, with a lower budget, by a mostly unknown company (n-Pictures from Belgium), with a Much smaller production crew (in fact for the Very Small size of the crew and manpower, this movie is an Utter Excellence Achievement). The thing that struck me immediately was the image quality was breath ta-kingly well rendered, with - tons - of detail everywhere. This is the Best of the best you can get for asset building and creation - Pixar movies with x100 times the budget and crew number can't even come close to that. For animation, though, of course having a bigger budget Pixar movies are obviously delivering more in the expressive 'realistically-styled' animation and funny, rich story/writing department that capture audience, that are the hallmarks of their movies. Their jokes are honed to perfection, they are masters are making jokes in their movies, with powerful expressive animation, timing (for the jokes delivery) and storytelling. The Wild Life can't deliver on these point, to the same degree. But it does a fair job. The sets are so beautiful to look at, I want to watch the movie again just for the sheer detail this small team was capable of pulling. One of the best sets, is the pirate ship and wrecked ships, they are so well made. The pirates themselves, Robinson Crusoe and the cats/animals on the island, are very cute and well made; they have a style of their own. I really liked that they made a quite realistic look to them, with very hi-resolution detailed textures. Like those two little rodents on the pirate ship's window talking to the parrot. A mouse and a rat, was funny, it was almost a nod to Ratatouille of Pixar, and they looked just as beautiful and nicely animated. I would the look in this movie, is a bit like Dreamworks CG movies look, it has some cartoons proportions - but is Very realistically 'shaded and lighting' (just like Pixar movies with realistic rendered look but cartoons caricature proportions). This makes for a cute movie but with quite impressive visuals. This movie is like an underdog, it should be higher but for everybody it falls flat because it goes up against huge CG movies like Pixar ones recent Finding Dory. Releasing The Wild Life at the same time as Finding Dory was going to be 'suicide', Finding Dory would crush it with impunity. I mean you just can't compare them in term of production value/budget, so it's unfair towards The Wild Life. If if had - been made by Pixar - with its same production values and the exact same story/not changing much anything besides adding more value/quality to animation/story/jokes.. - it would have had the success Of Finding Dory. That goes to show that - proportionally - for a small team of creative artists at n-Pictures - Pound for Pound, this movie destroys Findind Dory or any recent Disney-Pixar movie, including those Dreamworks ones (like Zootopia, Kungfu Panda-3, Life of Pets, etc, they have very fun subjects...are they better in general? nope, funnier/better/original story? yes.) For me, I give this a solid 9.25 out of 10, it's a very positioned-underdog with everything against it (money/time/production value) and (like a cult 'gem' movie that is 'un-understood' by the mass) that is worth a whole lot more than the crappy 5.2 score.
Blair Witch (2016)
Overall Good. 8 out of 10.
Hi, saw this yesterday on big screen. Let's just say..at the end of the movie, on a half-full theater, all I could sense on people's face was a certain indifference, a certain disdain, a certain 'what the f...did I just watch ???', a certain 'this is an utter piece of sh...', and a certain 'nice. enough...but not so nice - too much.....Nexxxt.' It was truly a mixed-bag, but more worse than bad. I even heard, when the end-credits started rolling, a man from a few seats behind say word for word ''This is sh*t''. Myself, I was neutral, I liked it, enough, but had a 'missing something' inside feeling, I fell more into the 'hype' of it and was a bit left 'wanting' more. And for the scary scenes, one woman was laughing wild (that was quite strange! loll...like some person laughing at a funeral - awkward), I mean, no one was laughing (but her)..it was serious matter and scary (people dying in the movie...and there this woman is laughing at the ridiculousness of it all, I was thinking 'huh...wtf??loll...this isn't funny... but then I thought to myself...Oh...I understand, she's laughing all the way because the movie s*KS so bad (for her I mean), she just can't connect - at all.. I may reveal some spoilers (warning to not read further if you do not wish I spoil your viewing already). I feel this movie is a bit of an underdog, again. They shouldn't, but they do, because people have seen so many (horror or other genre) movies. Blair witch (the original was incredible (original scary 'woods' story) if a little exaggerated but that turns out to be scary by 'make belief'of a story of 'scary witch'that existed in these woods and old lore. The difference between the original and this one, is mostly budget (while more budget works in favor some times (more money into story/script), here it doesn't), the cruddy 'NTSC cheap camcorder home-video' look of the first one/great story telling/tight acting with a small budget (60,000$) vs 5 million dollars for this new one. Here, Blair Witch, waits extremely long before the scares come in, way too long; I was getting impatient. last 20 minutes of the movie were the best but SO late in the movie that everyone in the room was 'disconnected' of the characters' plight. We could not 'engage' and care about any character because it was too late that they face the 'ordeal' (the witch). The first part is long and draw out; and does work to bring the 'dread' factor. There is mystery and the film does a fair job of building mystery around the lore. The acting is good and 'real'. The witch itself is never shown and for that it is terrifying (less is more, showing less monster increases audience imagination and 'wanting to see it anticipation', hiding the monster is always scarier than showing it), we hear noises creaks trees and branches cracking to 'reveal/suggest' its presence, it's scary - but it's so late in movie (about an hour into it) - we can't connect with characters' emotions to those scary stimulus. Thus, we don't feel tense or sadness when one character dies by the witch or some deadly hidden force in the dark woods. The sound design - sadly was non-existent, no musical atmospheric building, only dialectic forest sounds. Good but made it lackluster, it would have helped, like this it is sonic-ally flat - outside of the witch encounters themselves. But the witch's sound were utterly terrifying (described as like the earth quaking and the trees trembling like a tree falling on the ground with a screams of death, hard to explain, you know this Evil is UTTERLY Evil, it's the pure demon , far scarier than one in The Blair Witch first movie, which the truly scary moments where when the actors were scared themselves (very well) and when the tent was moving. I have to hand it to the post-production, editing, compo siting and CG witch compo siting team - d*MN, what a job this was...compo siting on this is a compositor's worse nightmare come true - the camera was shaking so much. The final drag of the last surviving woman is quite tense and you do feel for her, and her boyfriend, who tries his best in this. The most other nuisance and it's a killing point that drags the movie down immensely, is the 'home video look' it is taken way too far...as said the camera does - not - stop - shaking violently (so much it's a total blur, we can't see/make anything but a mess of blurred pixel colors!). At a certain point I almost had a headache, this is too much shaking, running, video home movie amateur 'shaky cam' 'low reality TV' feel, it ruined the potential (while in first film they dosed it, it was a novelty. One more thing, the last scary scenes show a lot of 1st POV of the camera of the survivor, people generally don't like (I noticed) 1st person point of view of the character, because they can't relate to the character (by not 'reading' the facial emotions in those crucial scenes in terms of emotion), thus they feel these shots seem like a video game 1st-person FPS shooter..rather than a film (this hampers the film's cinematography and quality). Still, Blair Witch is an underdog here, it has good production value 5M it's obvious (other movies look crap compared to this (they are less lucky and have less budget) yet may have better/more original story or character Development), the last part of the movie is quite decent and had very solid tense moments (the actors do a very solid job too, it's just they are not developed so we don't connect much beyond surface level), in fairness of cinema traditions, I give a solid 8 out of 10.
The Descent (2005)
Need more than 1000 words. IN ONE WORD. PERFECT.
Hi !
This movie is pure excellence, unlike the 'it's pure garbage' that I am reading from people whom did not like it at all. I will respect others opinions and if they fell it's an utter poss and it's 'the worst film I ever saw in my life.. With that said. So back to my feelings on this. I really can't understand people, I just don't...I'll try... I know it is not a movie that tries to be Oscar-worthy with deep layers of morality (there is some in this movie) and complex character development around a dramatic story. For horror ones (I despise this term I prefer thriller/suspense with horror elements, I know this is high categorizing which I don't like either, since it's pigeon holing, The audience also forgets that there are over 50,000 movies, it's 'normal' if someone else remade what you did. At some point, things can look similar when there are so many movies. ..so please cut some slack and be considerate of how hard it is to make a movie. So with that, further, said.
I want to say this movies is pure excellence because it hits the right notes : claustrophobia (some don't like that, hence hate the movie..understandable, still this element raises the movies scare factor), darkness (extremely important to increase the psychological factor (who is isn't afraid of utter darkness - stuck in a cave?), extremely impressive soundtrack and aural experience (the sound designers made sure there is reverberation and 'cave echo' everywhere in the movie (unlike in Descent 2, which is more flat sonic-ally and greatly affects the viewers spatial situations effect (trapped in a silent cave where every surround sound is heard in echo 3D surround sound fashion. In fact, The Descent boasts an incredible 7.1 channels instead of regular 5.1 (still great), the difference is massive, you hear creatures behind you, (side left, side right) everywhere this level of 3D surround sound 'envelopping/engulfing' effect is not heard of in other horror movies, where you feel more a passive eye, here you feel on the scene right in the cave - with the women.))), it features all-women cast (new, but not,,but new enough - as spelunkers, very new thus a originality), the creatures (which everyone laughs out as poor man's version of 'ghollum troll' or some other 'fake *ss' ''costume-prosthetics''...great ''prosthetics'', like great '3D CGI', as a tool, have their place and I don't think the 'bareness' of these cave creatures should be so dismissed (''a 'naked dude' with a 'ghollum mask'...nice..very scary.not.''). For me, the first part is a slow build-up, and the best one, I saw this at Fantasia in 2005, it took my breath away (No movie had done this in at least 20 years time, since the first Alien, and this movie is an homage to it also, Mr.Marshall said that he was inspired by these great horror movies such as the terrifying and slow potboiler Alien 1 of Mr.Scott),
I remember looking at these women fighting the Cave, fighting themselves (friendships dissolve as they are now - each fending for themselves), fighting death (pure survival), fighting creatures (yeah OK they don't exist - its a 'FICTION' read that word/Calm down with the 'it doesn't make sense/it's stupid and nonsensical brainless movie' accusation and an Excellent at that, but still they are late enough and have a certain degree of 'fitting in', it 'could' be possible (even if some said, these creatures would have evolved outside the cave/left it...not necessarily, they could have evolved Inside), When they face the pits/chasm it's utterly terrifying (to try to cross over and not fall to their death), the cave is so mean and unforgiving. Mr.Marshall uses important elements like coloring palette (he uses red during deadly scenes, green in more danger-free scenes, important red flare lighting and deep shadows blacks darkness to hide the elements and enhance utter fear) scares (great) hate the 'jumpscare' 'boo! a flying cat!' categorization (so pejorative and demeaning, it cheapens the horror genre to a big joke - 'cheap scares'...thanks..but dread is scary...but you do not scare someone - with ONLY dread, you need higher than that, 'jump' scares are that element that TAKE people by SURPRISE, you need it, you may despise it but it's a reality, to scare you, you need to be startled. The actress are incredible and heightened the fear (they are screaming, emotions and full of tears, you know this could BE YOU in the cave, surviving). , the scares are extremely well made with musical accents (staccato) but the whole movie is almost in surround silence (we only hear the surrounding noise of the cave and women's footsteps echos- frightening), there is utter viscerally and 'fight to the death' to live. It's a story of pure survival (blood, gore is never just for the sake, they really fight to death and Mr.Marshall makes sure we feel the grittiness of the survival. Survival Horror categorization (is what is used in games like Resident Evil)).
The cave is so foreboding is takes a form of 'character' itself (the shadows sculpt all the nice rock patterns, very detailed and realistic set construction, I saw the making of the Styrofoam rock sets). SIMPLY PUT : THE BEST SUSPENSE THRILLER HORROR/WITH HORROR ELEMENTS SINCE ALIEN 1 AND SHINING, YES, EVEN SHINING OR EXORCIST. Congrats Mr.Marshall, please make The Descent 3 (Descent 2 was great but nowhere near 1st one), I await it so much.