Change Your Image
Joe Hill
Reviews
Ankle Biters (2002)
No no no. Give someone a digital camera and they think they're a film maker.
What's going on? I'm sure you used to have to show some sort of vague talent before someone let you make a film? I rented this from the video store, and I was expecting bad acting, lots of blood, cheap horror, vampires biting ankles. But this???
I'm not going to complain about things that were constrained by budget, as obviously you've got to start somewhere etc, and this guy clearly had no money. But there was no creativity whatsoever.
The lingering, slow, purposeless shots of cars... driving... down... roads. And the action scenes without the merest hint of directing talent, or actors willing to do any kind of stunts. And no matter how many times you reverse a shot of someone jumping off a tall thing, it doesn't make it "charming" or a "marvel". And what was with that scene in the middle where the sound goes really quiet? If you're reading this director-man, did you not watch this film once you'd made it? Obviously you had no boom mike, but you can't just make a scene where you can't hear the plot.
I read the back of the video sleeve - dwarf vampires take over the world - and though this could perhaps be the best film ever made. Sadly not. It's not big or clever. It's not cult. It's just badly made.
A person making a film on celluloid would had to pay for every foot of film, thereby making them careful and selective with what they shot. But if this is the way things are going with DV, I think I'd rather poke out my eyes than watch another amatuer DV film.
Repo Jake (1990)
Why was this film released? Why did I watch it?!?
**Minor spoilers** but don't worry, the films not good enough to spoil.
Repo Jake is a miserably low-budget TV film, starring a host of second rate TV bit part players. The voice of the bad guy in Power Rangers, Grizzly Adams from numerous Grizzly Adams films, and that old guy from Wayne's World who gets his mask removed in the Scooby Doo ending.
Anyways, I stray from the point. The film is bad. I watched it with my housemate, and I think that may have doubled the total number of people who have ever watched it. In fact, I'm not sure why I'm writing this as no-one will ever read it. Never mind.
It starts off as a showpiece for various stuntmen, and the stunts aren't that bad. We're not talking Bond jumping off a damn, or men hanging on the back of Stagecoaches, but their not bad in a "Fall Guy" kind of way. The stunts, however, are completely unconnected to what plot their is, which features the exciting life of repo men. I suppose someone saw "Repo Man" and thought they'd jump in on the action, but where Alex Cox wrote and directed his film as a bizarre action comedy, Joseph Merhi loses the bizarre and the comedy and virtually all the action. I think his only hope was that people would confuse one with the other.
The back of the video (why it was distributed on video in this country I'll never know. It's deleted now - thank God) claims all sorts of car chases, 'sadistic porn rings', action, and romance. It's not that these things aren't there, it's just that more often than not they are simply referred to rather than being part of the plot.
This film does have a few redeeming features. Well, two. The lead character, played by Dan Haggarty, is quite good. He's not a good actor by any stretch of any imagination, but he's got a great presence, and and even better beard. The other redeeming feature is the last scene - I'm not spoiling the plot by saying it's a car race. It's quite well put together. A bit of dodgy editing here and there, but quite exciting nonetheless.
Repo Jake seems to have two gears. Neutral and then maybe third (not quite top gear, but moving along at about 30). It's either tediously dull, with characters you don't care about spouting bad lines in a plot that makes no sense, or it's vaguely enjoyable action that has nothing to do with the plot.
I gave this film a 2, which I think is pretty generous. If you're really into low-budget straight-to-US-cable-TV films, with bad acting, awful dialogue and average action - this is the film for you! Or if you just want to keep me company as one of the few people in the world who have actually seen it, then give it a go.
Resident Evil (2002)
Are you people blind?
People keep giving this film good reviews. It was just bad. Bad bad bad. Why do studios keep giving Paul Anderson money? If someone makes a debut as bad as 'Shopping', then continues to consistently make awful films (okay, 'Event Horizon' was good ish, but the ending was a farce) why does Hollywood keep giving them money? 'Mortal Kombat' anyone? At least 'Soldier' was so horrifically bad that you could laugh at it, and at the $20 million that Kurt walked off with. But 'Resident Evil'? It's not difficult making a Zombie film. Zombies stumble around, Zombies chew people, Zombies get shot. What's the problem? All I ask for is some mindless violence, Milla with a big gun shooting Zombies. Did I get it? No! After she started kicking the dogs, you think, 'oo here we go, action.' But no! Paul W. S. Anderson as he's now known, fails to deliver - yet again! A solid 1 out of 10 for me, I'm afraid Paul. And no matter how many initials you put in your name, you're not gonna get confused with P.T. Anderson.
I say to all you people out there to broaden your horizons, get out of the multiplex and down to your local video rental shop. 'Evil Dead', 'Dawn of the Dead', 'Braindead', 'Bad Taste' - these are real zombie films. 'Starship Troopers', 'Aliens', 'Buckaroo Banzai' - these are real sci-fi films. And if you want mindless action, watch an eighties Arnie film.
Resident Evil has stolen 2 hours of my life, and I want them back!