Reviews

I watched this as part of my course at Aberystwyth University and it baffles me how this does not have a distributor in the UK. Well actually, it doesn't, because this film is everything a Hollywood film isn't - original, creative, quirky and humorous. It seems that today no-one really wants to see this type of movie as, in the simplest terms, it doesn't conform to the generic conventions most young viewers look for in a film.

I haven't written a review for the IMDb for ages but felt inclined to give this film a special mention, even if it is during my 30 minute break between classes! Essentially, it is about nothing, as the two main characters are plunged into their own world of nothingness through a hate of the world. The brilliance here is how the director sustains interest through the majority of the run time with only two characters and when the only mise-en-scene consists of half a house and a vast white, empty space. This is due in large part to the stellar performances of the actors, both of whom offer some great laughs while at the same time being able to add significant emotional depth to their roles.

I'd love to write some more but am on quite a time limit. However I encourage anyone and everyone to give this film a try. A very unique concept is brought to the screen in a coherent and well-executed fashion, with the combination of good performances, a strong script, nice sound design and (fairly) impressive visuals creating a very entertaining movie.

It's just a shame so few people know about Nothing....

Wow. What am I doing lately? I watched John McTiernan's Rollerball last night and, despite reading so many bad reviews of it, insisted on watching it just to see how on earth such a great director can kill his career so quickly and easily. Now, 24 hours later, I hire 'Ticker', expecting much of the same. Suffice to say this is not as bad as Rollerball, but it sure aint far off. OK - the plot: Dennis Hopper is a mad bomber (where have I seen that before???) who is blowing up random places in the city to get his girlfriend back. Tom Sizemore is an on-the-edge cop who is out to get Hopper after he killed his partner. How f***ing original. Cue 90 minutes of some of the worst dialogue, acting, editing, direction and special effects I have ever seen. Segal's performance is so abysmal he could tranquilise a horse and Dennis Hopper seems to have lost the will to live, let alone act. He seems to keep forgetting that his character is Irish, and as a result, his accent changes incoherently. Good lord, I'm struggling to continue.

OK, last points before I catch the elevator to the top of a big building to jump off - Check out the scene when Hopper is in the car with Jaime Pressley (who actually serves no purpose whatsoever in this 'film'). Have you ever seen blue screen work executed in such a way? The background just suddenly stops moving, like Hopper drove into a brick wall. That's right - just stops. And then Jaime gets out of the car and oh..... I must stop. We also never see a shot of Segal below the waste - the guy is obviously hitting maximum density weight-wise and must not want people to see his flabby gut. Oh, and for the record, the ponytail is back with a vengeance.

And the end sequence - a horrible barrage of hammy acting, appaulingly choreographed fight sequences and the most anti-climatic 'climax' I have ever seen. Well, apart from Rollerball. You really have to see it to believe it. The last period uses a mass of stock footage from other films such as helicopters that are a certain colour in one scene and then change to a different colour in the next. UUUUGGGGHHHH! I'm about to catch that elevator.

It breaks my heart to see an actor like Hopper (who can forget his performance in Blue Velvet?) waste his talent on utter garbage like this. Please promise me, no matter how much you like Steven 'Squintmeister' Segal, to never EVER rent, buy or even watch this abomination to cinema. The blue screen SFX are enough to convince even the dumbest of people to stay away from this. It truly is every bit as bad as it seems.

Rarely do we ever get to see a film like this in cinemas so if you haven't seen it yet, stop reading this comment now and go see it. Now.

Dog Soldiers is, in a word, fantastic. It has a wicked blend of horror, suspense, fear, comedy and action which you rarely get in horror flicks of today and it all adds to the films pull. It is high on blood and guts but it's there for a reason - unlike other Hollywood horrors. The acting is great and director Neil Marshall creates characters who we like - unlike other Hollywood films. The special effects were awesome and the crew did not resort to sub-standard CGI, common in all Hollywood movies. Without giving too much away, this is one of the best horror films of recent years and hopefully will go on to inspire many more like it. Although it has its bad points - notably excessive dialogue scenes - it is fantastic fun, so don't waste anymore time contemplating whether or not you should see it. See it NOW!

As you will probably have gathered from my alias, I am a huge Cameron fan. For a long time he was my favourite director, only recently being overtaken by David Lynch. For months I saw this film lying in a £5 DVD bargain bucket and wondered whether or not I should get it. Finally, after seeing the original on TV just a few days ago, I figured 'what the hell'. You can look at this film from two points of view - as a piece of filmmaking, in which case you cannot comprehend how bad it is, or as a fun B-movie. I chose the latter. Yes, it has the most dire plot known to man, yes, the fish are as convincing as, well, badly made plastic fish and the acting is sub-standard at best, but it is nonetheless a fun movie to watch late at night. The acting from the leads - notably Lance Henriksen - is moderately good, although supporting roles raise the question "Was the casting director on drugs?" as we are presented with some of the worst acting of the 80's. The special effects are atrocious and despite the fact that we are led to believe that there are thousands of flying piranhas on the shore, only a handful fly out of the water on wires. Out of the few gore shots, they are all obviously rubber appliances/models and the actors really let us know that they are in scrutinizing pain by whispering 'Ah.'

To be honest, I found it incredibly hard to believe that this was James Cameron's work. Perhaps it could be put down to the fact that he did not write it and had no support from the production side. A microscopic budget would not have helped matters either, but nontheless, it aint all that bad.

Watch it when you're drunk with some mates for a laugh, but for God's sake, don't take it seriously or else you'll end up having a mental breakdown.

Three out of ten.

Watching Halloween H20 for the first time in 3 years last night, I realised how much this whole thing just stank of Scream. A very basic plot gives way for a somewhat cliched Michael Myers and predictable scenarios. It must be said though that performances in the film were all excellent, especially John Hartnett who has since gone on to bigger and better things. I felt I could relate to some of the characters and I liked everyone, which is always a good thing. There are some great scenes where tension is often built up to unbearable levels, but the fact that this is done every 5 minutes tires the viewer down (certainly did me anyway). Although I think that this sequel knocks spots of every previous sequel, I simply felt like I was watching a totally different kind of movie. The atmosphere is totally different and the music score is very weak in places. Perhaps the biggest letdown though was the throat slashing in the first ten minutes, where it was blatantly obvious that the knife was indented to fit around the womans neck!

H20 is certainly a film worth watching, but then again, there are far better films out there. I give it 3 out of 5.

We all know that Van Damme has made some good movies, none that are really memorable but at least entertaining. Sadly, he is more renowned for his bad films - the late nineties saw a string of them: Double Team, Knock Off, Universal Soldier 2, Desert Heat. And, as much as I like the guy, he got his just deserts when they started to be released Direct-to-Video. However, when a film like Replicant comes along, this is where the tragedy really happens. It deserves sooooo much more credit. Now, by no means is Replicant Oscar winning material, far from it actually, but it is nevertheless a gripping, original flick. For one of the first times in a JCVD film, we really feel pity for a character - Replicant, as he is constantly beaten up and abused. Van Dammes acting as the clone is fantastic as is his portrayal of The Torch. The film has some fantastic stuntwork, from the incredibly realistic destruction of the Torch's apartment to the ambulance chase between the same guy and Jake (Michael Rooker). I honestly believe that this film is worthy of a wide theatrical release, it's just a shame it never happened as this truly marks the comeback for JCVD.

To conclude, Replicant is a very dark, sometimes unsettling thriller that really draws you into the action. It takes a while to get going but the ending is fantastic. Performances all round were good and the action scenes were quite simply beautiful. It just seems like it's too little too late for the Muscles from Brussels...

I wrote a very long review before but for some reason only my summary was up, so here goes at a second attempt. Being the dead fan I am (I have a dead trilogy website) I couldn't resist seeing this movie, even knowing that it would be pretty bad in comparison to Romero's movies. Quite simply, I was blown away. Never before (and I mean this) have I seen such a dire plot, such awful acting and such diabolical camera work. This film isn't even one of those 'So bad it's good' events, failing on every possible level. Cue 90 minutes of unbelievably bad dubbing, atrocious story lines and god-awful filming techniques. It is so hard to express how bad this film is. The film jumps forward 14 years, then 1 year and so on yet has no continuity. We do not know what is going on as each time segment has no relation to the previous one. It is criminal that this film was ever made, and the cheek of John Russo (who I would take great pleasure in torturing) to call this the 'long awaited sequel'. How can people possibly believe that this is good? Surely someone on set would have realised that they were making one of the worst films in history (and that's no lie either).

To be honest, I would go so far as to pay people not to watch this, in the vain hope that all copies would be pulled from shelves and the negatives be burnt. I can't even give this an IMDB rating of one as it simply does not deserve that kind of credibility. Atrocious.

We all know that Van Damme's career has gone downhill dramatically recently. It's no surprise though, because in all honesty he has never made an excellent, memorable film. I rented this out not expecting much - the 'direct to video' tag kinda told me that it would be lacklustre anyway. But, what's this? Made by the same guy who did Rocky! Wow, it's going to be awesome!

Actually, I could not have been more wrong. The most terrible script gives Van Damme absolutely nothing to work from and director Avildsen's obsession with poor humour makes it even more unbearable. The acting is atrocious throughout, with only JCVD and his Indian pal putting in good performances. I was constantly confused by what was going on, there was no logical advancement in the story - out of the blue a group of psychos suddenly need Van Damme dead.

This feels just like those god-awful TV movies that come on at 2am and I advise everyone in the world to avoid seeing Coyote Moon/Desert Heat/Inferno (why so many names as well?). The only redeeming features are: 1) Van Damme, who actually appears to be quite 'cool', 2) The OTT sex scene and 3) the short running time.

2 out of 10

Now - don't misinterpret the summary. By no means is this a good film, in fact it's far from it. But the point is, Universal Soldier was one of those films where a related sequel seemed impossible. And, thanks to these two TV made efforts and the dire Unisol: The Return, my theory is supported.

Anyway, down to business. This is a movie that should never have been made. Obviously Van Damme, Ally Walker and the other original cast members decided not to be a part of this so the producers brought in total unknowns, a very bad move. Matt Battaglia's acting is awful at the best of times and Chandra West tries way too hard to immitate Ally Walker's brilliant performance from the original film, and fails dismally. Gary Busey, once an awesome actor who nearly killed Martin Riggs and Casey Ryback throws his career away with the worst performance of his career. From Lethal Weapon to this, I can't believe it. I might add as well that he seems to developing a very, very weird vocal problem, it's almost as if he's got nuts stuffed in his cheeks. Burt Reynold's also gives us an appalling display, putting on the worst Irish accent I have ever heard.

The plot is virtually non-existent. In fact, I can't remember what it is actually. The director made a bad decision too by giving the rest of the Unisol's personalities, a feat copied by Mic Rogers for the 'Official' sequel. This basically makes them seem like human soldiers, not the souless, robotic types Roland Emerich created for the first movie which made it so believable.

I could go on forever, but I won't and will instead list the positive aspects. This film knocks spots off Universal Soldier: The Return as it at least tries to relate itself to the original. Starting with the head pieces, the leg implants, the heat monitor watch, Dr Gregor, Luc's parents and the laboratory in the truck (albeit a tiny, non-expanding one).

As I said, Universal Soldier is a film that cannot really be continued, and to be honest this film got as close as anyone could - presumably the action is continuing from where the first film left off, with Luc and Veronica still on the run.

So, the conclusion. This is a bad film. There is only one explosion and out of the two big name actors, they both give diabolical performances. However, in comparison to the Van Damme sequel, it really isn't that bad and any fan of JCVD or Unisol's should at least watch it once. 4 out of 10.

Yes, you read the title right. As a massive Terminator fan, I wanted to check this out as it was scripted by Tedi Safarian, who is the man (or one of them) behind the script for T3. This movie is so bad it has dented all of my expectations for the new Terminator movie as the story lacks a complete sense of direction.

Basically, we are introduced to two families driving through the desert. A bunch of psychos follow them and drive past them at breakneck speeds, shortly before taking them hostage. Why? Sure they are crazy but it still doesn't make any sense at all!

The entire film has the atmosphere of those god awful tv movies (take Motorcycle Gang for example) and despite a relatively well-known cast, fails to deliver on every level. In the end you find yourself rooting for the bad guys as Christopher Lambert's acting is just terrible, not to mention the look on his face.

However, credit is due where credit is due. The lead 'Road Killer' Cliff is played with genuine menace by Craig Sheffer as is David Arquettes character of Bobby.

Good characters still ain't enough though to salvage this mess of a film and to be perfectly honest, you are better spending 100 minutes of your life cutting grass with a pair of scissors.

All in all, The Road Killers (or Roadflower as it is known in the UK) wins itself a meagre 3 out of 10.

You can find this on the special edition release of Tomorrow Never Dies and it is quite entertaining. The best bit is the in depth analysis on the production of TND, although there are some other nice segments. Shame that it only runs for half an hour but nevertheless, well worth a look.

You'll find this on the UK Special Edition of GoldenEye and it offers a fantastic insight into the world of 007 (hence the title). The programme covers every aspect of JB, from the Bond actors, the women, the stunts, the music, the gadgets and so-on. Indeed the best part is the stunt section which offers some never before seen footage of a boat crash outtake in Live and Let Die and various other mis-haps. You also get a side-splitting interview with old crumbly Rog Moore, talking about stunts, that goes something like this - "Stunt men get adrenaline out of their work. I myself do not." Your telling me! He even had to use a stunt double to kick someone in the head in A View To A Kill!

Anyway, aside from the decaying Moore, Liz Hurley is a considerably good host, squeezing into the tightest of catsuits and dresses while feeding us a load of primitive info on the different sections of the show.

All in all, a fantastic piece of stuff. Despite the annoying ad-breaks that pop up every ten minutes, it's still something that simply cannot be missed!

If you are a proper Bond fan then you'll know that I am being sarcastic. This is without doubt the worst Bond movie for countless reasons.

First of all, the choice of Sean Connery as the main man was a big mistake as he simply looks tired, old and uninvolved with the film. Despite him being the fans favourite, no matter how hard he tries he just cannot slip back into the tux. Right from the cheesy opening, you know that you're in for a rough ride.

The diabolical music score adds to the films incompetence and the lack of the gun barrel at the beginning gives the entire piece a false feeling. The set design as well is very poor and looks incredibly dated for 1983. Actually, if you compare it to the original Bond films of the 60's - Dr No, FRWL, Goldfinger etc - you would not be able to tell the difference. The visual effects are also lame - the animated rockets look so horrific I could have sworn they were plucked from a Tom and Jerry cartoon. However, if there is one reason to see this then it's the fight scene at the start which is actually very well choreographed. Aside from that though, stick with the original Thunderball. That may not be great, but it's a damm sight better than this tripe.

3 out of 10

People often criticise Dalton for being far too serious as Bond, forgetting that he read every Flemming novel in order to make his character as true as possible. Personally, I think he is the best Bond by a long way and it's very sad that we only saw him make two movies as 007. However, the two he made are fantastic achievements.

License to Kill is unique in the way that every character is played by a fantastic actor. Robert Davi's performance as Sanchez is a career best for the chap and Dalton's hard, moody portrayal as Bond is simply amazing. The action scenes are beautifully choreographed and obviously are helped by Dalton doing many of his own stunts. Everything about this movie has a gritty realism to it and the addition of more violence and bad language works incredibly well.

Forget what the critics say, if you want the definitive Bond film then look no further than this masterpiece. An unprecedented 10 out of 10.

As a huge Terminator fan I always watch out for other films the cast have made. I found out about DRC quite a while back and was desperate to see it. However, a limited cinema release here in the UK meant that I did not get to see it on the big screen. It was not until July 2001 that I saw it for rental on DVD and that's when I decided to get it. At first glance it looked awful - the security guard Elvis, the numerous cliches like a spotty geek student but after a while it grew on me. There are some genuinely funny moments, namely the toilet scene which has only been bettered in American Pie. It also becomes quite sad later on as we see the four boys relationship fall apart due to the fact that they cannot find any Kiss tickets.

Having bought it on DVD two weeks later, I found that I liked it even more. The humour, the acting and the set pieces are all excellent with the ending the only weak spot.

So - if you like rock music then by all means buy this. However, if American Pie or Road Trip is more your sort of thing then I'd only reccomend renting this. Overall I give it 7 out of 10.

I can't really say much other than this is a far cry from the original. After the lacklustre JP2 - The Lost World, I was expecting something better here but instead I was greeted with incredibly bad special effects and blatantly annoying characters. The whole film lacks direction and suspense and in the end I was hoping for the CG dinosaurs to rip the cast to pieces to prevent a fourth installment. I give it 1 out of 10, seriously.

I first heard of Unisol 2 when I drove past a cinema when I was on holiday in America. I really did not take much notice of it until I bought the original on DVD which led me to find out about its three sequels. I subsequently started to read about The Return on the IMDB and asked friends what they thought of it. Despite their horrific criticisms of it, I still went out of my way to see it and was on the brink of buying it until I saw it for hire on DVD. I wasn't expecting much but thought that it must have been half decent to get a theatrical release in the US, after all, how often is it that you see Van Damme on the big screen? Well, nothing could have prepared me for this. It is so bad I almost cried. What a total waste of 80 minutes and £2.50. It is hard to explain how bad this move is. Honestly. This is idiotic film making. No, it's more than idiotic. I just cannot believe how this got made. I cannot believe that someone out there has not murdered Mic Rogers. How stupid can people possibly be - firstly, Van Damme actually thinking the script and finished film was good. Secondly, the fact that Xander Berkley, of Terminator 2 and Air Force One status, commited himself to this film. I simply cannot believe the stupidity of this movie. It takes itself so seriously but comes across to the audience like a spoof. Here is an example: JCVD's daughter (yes, Luc is now a human again)- "I want my Daddy", SETH- "So do I". Oh yeah, and some guy tries to shut down SETH by pulling three huge levers with - wait for it - ON and OFF written on them. The acting all round is like playschool acting. I'm sure Mr Director modelled Luc's reporter girlfriend on April O'Neil from the cartoon Teenage Mutant Hero Turtles - she refuses to go because she '...needs her story'. I mean come on - how many cliches can a film possibly use? Please listen to me fellow IMDB users - don't touch this with a barge pole. To conclude, Universal Soldier: The Return has no relation whatsoever to the first movie. In fact, if they weren't called UniSols then you would never know it was a sequel. Luc is now a human again - what the hell!?! The only place in which he can access the internet is in a stripclub. All the new Uni Sols look like they were dragged off the street, they are that unconvincing. This is pure torture to watch, so do yourself a favour - don't torture yourself. P.S - Best part of the movie: Romeo jumps off a building and shouts 'Oh sh*t'.

I first saw Universal Soldier when I was about 10 and I can remember how entertained I was. At the time, it was a relatively new concept (cyborg/ reanimated people) and that is what I think really drew people to this movie. I have just bought the DVD here in the UK hoping that I would still share my enthusiasm of seven years ago, but in all honesty I was not. There are some great action sequences - the dam and the final showdown to name a few - and all were beautifully choreographed. However, the fast paced plot of the first half hour really begins to die the moment most of the Uni Sols burn up, and afterwards you realise that it is basically another one of Van Dammes weak attempts at rivalling Arnie or Sly. As I said - the action is great, mainly due to having Vic Armstrong on board, but don't expect miracles. Afterall, a movie that takes music from Terminator 2 for its trailers cannot be that good, can it? 6 out of 10.

Being such a huge fan of American Graffiti, I was thrilled when I saw that it was out on video finally (we here in the UK have been deprived of it for 20 years). Checking out the IMDB while waiting for it to arrive, I was, however, weary of my purchase. An average 4 out of 10 did not look good. Of course, the mistake everyone makes though is that this should be compared to the original - which is impossible. AG was, and still is, a unique film that can never be replicated. Thus, I have to commend the concept behind this other unique gem, which follows four characters through four different New Years Eves. The return of so many original cast members is fascinating, even the little Pharoh is back helping Big John on his dragster! Yes, the split screens from Debbie's year was annoying, but apart from that I cannot really criticise this film. It is more of a documentary - style 'Where are they now' kind of thing, and it really works! So - here is my advise. Unfortunately this aint on DVD, so you'll need a VHS too. Watch the original and marvel at its delights. Then, the moment the credits finish rolling, whack this vid into your player. This way, you won't be disappointed. 10 out of 10.

I saw this for the first time in ages when it was aired on ITV recently. Being a huge Terminator fan I thought the opportunity to see another Jim Cameron movie was too good to miss, and I wasn't wrong. I thought it would be impossible to beat Ridley Scott's fantastic original of 1979, but Aliens not only equals it, but SURPASSES it. From the huge build up of tension in the first 45 minutes to the phenomenal action sequences, Aliens never lets up. Stan Winstons special effects are also as dazzling as the rest of the movie and adds the element of 'perfection' to the movie.

I was amazed to like Alien, hating all stuff to do with space, but the fact that I give that a 7 and Aliens an 8 out of ten just proves what fantastic direction they are both given. Unmissable.

You know, they should make a DVD boxset consisting of Jaws 2, Jaws 4 and - Jesus - this crap that is Jaws 3. Why? Well, in simple terms it could be used as an extreme torture device, DVD quality making the pain even worse. I won't say anything about the plot (even though there is not one) but I will say something about the dazzling, state-of-the-art special effects, the only thing that salvages the movie. Basically there is some underwater sea life park and some folks go down to check it out in a little orange diving machine. Unbelievable! You wouldn't think for one minute that they were using a miniature centre made from yogurt pots, or a diving machine so super-imposed one side of it totally disappears in one scene! Nah, great SFX. They could even be compared to the might of the Doctor Who films made in the sixties, with flying saucers on strings etc. Oh sorry, I forgot - they weren't actually made from yogurt pots.

You can probably figure out that I dislike this movie a lot, and you'd be right. But please, take note from this review - when Carl Gottleib put pen to toilet paper we thought we'd have on OK movie. It turns out that looking at a dog turd for 90 minutes would give you more adrenaline rushes than this total tosh.

I watched this purely because Linda Hamilton was in it, and the moment I found out it was based on a true story I knew it would suck. The entire movie follows Hamilton, she is in every scene and without her presence the whole thing would suck. Not that it sucks already. There was no excitement, no adrenaline rushes - it was just bad.

I can't say much about this movie other than it really disappoints. It spends ages setting scenes and when it builds up tension and atmosphere it simply lets it go immediately. Don't get me wrong, it does have its good points and the end battle is great, but it really lacks something. Watch it if you are bored, but don't expect miracles. 6 out of 10.