Reviews

I have long enjoyed horror films, though I find the plot twists and atmosphere to be more enjoyable than the gore and the body counts. So I was not certain what to expect from a modern found-footage anthology. I was pleasantly surprised to find that most of the stories had an underlying theme of duplicity, and depicted people being betrayed by their friends or loved ones. The plot twists were decent, and there was genuine effort to develop some of these characters. I enjoyed most of the segments, but not all of them.:

*"Tape 56" is the film's frame story, and depicts a gang of hoodlums in what turns out to be a suicide mission. A rather forgettable story, featuring interchangeable characters and rather poor dialogue. There was little effort here to depict the characters as individuals, and I found none of them to be interesting.

*"Amateur Night" was a standout. A trio of male jerks pick up two young women for a gang bang, but one of their cuties turns out to be a female demon. I found most of the dialogue here to be painfully bad, but I found Lily the demon to be a memorable character. I love female predators in horror films, and Lily was an interesting mix of a menacing threat and an emotionally vulnerable woman. Great job here by her actress.

*"Second Honeymoon" starts rather slowly, following a vacationing couple in a rather dull sight-seeing tour. But the tensions in their relationship were interesting, as was their habit of never sharing a bed. The story turned out to be a decent variation of the "wolf in sheep's clothing", with the smiling wife having planned her husband's death in advance. The dialogue here was much better, and the execution was genuinely creepy.

*"Tuesday the 17th" is in large part a subversion of typical slasher tropes. A young woman leads her new friends to your typical haunted forest. But they soon realize that she has lied to them about her motivation, and she quickly starts dropping hints about her traumatic past. She is there to confront an old foe, and the "friends" are mere pawns in a lethal game. This is a villain vs. Villain battle, and the "Final Girl" is just as cruel and calculating as the serial killer. The segment has a long list of unresolved questions, but Wendy was a pretty good villain.

*"The Sick Thing That Happened to Emily When She Was Younger" features a young woman confiding her fears and problems to her long-distance boyfriend. Who turns out to be part of a conspiracy that has been gaslighting her for quite some time. The alien fetus and alien implant in this story would not be out of place in "X-Files", but the tragedy of misplaced trust and misplaced love make this an above average horror story.

*"10/31/98" is a holiday-horror tale, with four partygoers in disguise stumbling into a haunted house, an exorcism attempt, a possessed damsel in distress, and poltergeist phenomena. Much effort was evidently placed in the special effects of this segment, and I appreciated the fact that the damsel quickly started resembling the White Ladies of traditional ghost stories. But there is very little effort at exposition here, and the viewers were left guessing at the motivations of most of the characters. I enjoyed the segment, but I thought it was both too short and too fast-paced.

The film has in its cast some of the finest comic actors available, but mostly wastes them in inane jokes. The entire plot revolves on the stereotype that Pontic Greeks (an ethnic minority in Greece) are idiots, so much of the plot recycles old jokes about their supposed stupidity. Unfortunately, none of them are particularly amusing or interesting.

The film's depiction of Germany is unusually detailed and at times cynical. Unfortunately, "humor" is provided by rather stale anti-German stereotypes, with some dating back to World War II. A doctor who resembles Adolf Hitler and beats up his own patients is treated as a highlight, but physical abuse is not that funny as a subject matter.

The film has two romantic subplots: The arranged marriage of Giorikas to the ugly sister of his best friend, and the rescue romance between Kostikas and the sister of one of his enemies. Neither is particularly well-developed. Giorikas repeatedly comments about his bride's unattractive looks and general behavior, but does not oppose the wedding arrangements. Kostikas protects a pretty woman from two jerks who were harassing her, then has a couple of dates with her and the finale features his wedding day. They know next to nothing about each other, have few on-screen interactions, and Kostikas is unemployed when he proposes, but nobody finds their wedding to be a hasty decision.

The film provides a couple of memorable moments, but otherwise suffers from poor writing and undeveloped characters.

The "My Littler Pony" franchise holds a special place in my heart. I loved the 1980s film and associated television series, and they were among the earliest works that sparked my interest in animation. It introduced me to some nice fantasy and (toned down) horror tropes. I also loved the 2010s television series and some of its spin-offs, in large part because of featuring a rather large and well-developed cast of characters. I was not certain what to expect from a film that attempted to introduce an entirely new cast of characters and a new setting for the franchise. I was quite pleasantly surprised. The film has a relatively small cast of major characters, and managed to explore some interesting aspects of most of them.

The positives of the film: *Sunny Starscout makes for a quite interesting protagonist. An idealist who hopes to change the world, but struggles with the loss of her father, with social isolation, and with a long string of failures in her efforts. When she goes on a heroic quest, the film displays quite a bit of her determination, her skills, her character flaws, and how she deals with the spectre of failure on her horizon. Far from a one-note character, and one I would like to see explored in additional tales.

*Izzy Moonbow is the sole unicorn among the main cast. An overly-enthusiastic artist, who seems to be the sole optimist in a settlement where everyone suffers from chronic depression. By far the cutest character in the film, but also the one most likely to make giant leaps of faith in an attempt to achieve her goals. She plays the mentor in some scenes, and the wide-eyed student in others. Fun to watch, but with more than a hint of sorrow in several of her scenes.

*Pipp Petals, a girly-girl royal princess with a side-career as a singer. In a single night, she goes from a popular idol of the crowds into a wanted fugitive, and has to adapt quickly to an unfamiliar world. A surprisingly endearing character with vanity as her main flaw, but a lack of any malice and an ability to win the favor of those around her. Not quite the diva stereotype. She doesn't often get the spotlight in the film, but shines in her moments.

*Zipp Storm, a rather tomboyish princess with a combination of physical skills and a scholar's passion for uncovering historical secrets. I think she is the worst-looking among the main cast (her colors are somewhat bland and she lacks distinctive physical features), but she comes across as an interesting and intelligent character. With the film indicating that she tends to be overlooked by everyone, including her own mother. I would like to see more of how her unfavorite status affects her.

*Sprout. The film's main antagonist. A mean-spirited deputy sheriff who turns into a demagogue and exploits a crowd's fears and shared hatred as stepping stones in a quest for political power. With his end goal being a position as a dictator and starting a war by invasion. He is not particularly bright, he lacks self-control, but he is a surprisingly realistic character who is reminiscent of many real-life demagogues. His methods are never subtle, but they tend to work for him.

The mediocre aspects of the film: *Hitch Trailblazer. The male co-protagonist of the film. His behavior and thinking processes seem to be rather contradictory throughout the film. In some scenes, he acts as a lifelong friend with undying loyalty. In others, he is an antagonist whose obsession with capturing Sunny is Javert-like, as he looses sight of any other goal or obligation. And in others he acts as the reluctant hero. I don't think the constant flip-flopping works particularly well here.

*The film has a number of supporting characters and minor antagonists, but they are not particularly unique or memorable. Among them a corrupt businesswoman, a rather manipulative queen, and a tough guy obsessed with competitive games. They are not different than similar characters in any number of films.

*The idea of fire-forged friends bonding through a difficult mission is handled well, but is rather generic for fantasy-themed works. "My Little Pony" has already used similar plots in several previous incarnations, so it is far from new territory.

The negative aspects of the film: *The outcomes of certain situations in the film are based on rather contrived coincidences. Used once, this may be overlooked, three or more times in the same film gets rather ridiculous.

*The film introduces a number of subplots which are either quickly dropped, or are left hanging by the end of the film. One main character had her home destroyed, two others are facing criminal charges, a fourth one has to resume his career with nobody there to help him, and the main villain is barely punished (other than the fact that he is distrusted by his own mother). For a "happy ending", this leaves too many open questions concerning the characters' fates.

*Sprout's plan begins to unravel when he orders his slavish soldiers to attack without provocation, and some of them refuse to obey. The scene leaves it entirely unclear whether they object to the orders, or are simply too afraid to obey them. This undermines the importance of the scene.

This is quite an interesting series not because of its faithfulness to Bram Stoker's novel but because it introduces modern versions of the characters and as the novel reported Stoker's concerns for the problems of his time this one reports our concerns for our own time.Spoilers ahaid.

As in the novel Vlad Tsepes, here caling himself Count Vladimir Tsepes, decides to leave his castle and move to the west.Here his reasons are that he feels tired from Rumania's decline and the seclusion of his life during the last centurie or so.Thus he decides to move to Budapest of Hungary.He wants to raise an armie of vampires and he goes there to search for recruits since he now only has three female vampires.

There he discusses he pursuits the Carfax manor by doing some illegal business with businessman Jonathan Harker.He also wants Jonathan's help in turning his colection of paintings, jewels and his gold deposit to cash.Jonathan's friends fellow businessman Quincey Morris, specialising in money swindles, and Arthur Holmwood, a British diplomat that is in a dept and is realy in need of money offer to help.Though Jonathan and Arthur have their doubts about the deal Quincey convinces them that money is all that matters and its one true power that makes the world go around.

Along with the three are Jonathan's girlfriend Mina Murray, with strong moral values and does her best to help orphanages and hospitals, and her friend Lucy Westenra, a true sexual predator.She also introduces to the gang her new lover and Dr.Seward, much to Arthur's disappointment since he is love with her.

Dracula gets very interested in those three young men, hungry for money and power, Lucy who wants to sleep in many beds, in many cities , have new experiences and live for ever and Mina who wants to change the world and end human suffering.They all seem as fine recruits.Throughout the film Dracula tries to seduce all five of them into his own world, make them wish to become vampires.Focusing again and again on how hyprotical morality is and promising them the loss of their conciense that now bothers them.Convincing them that survival of the fittest is the proper way and even the strong can't save the weak.And referencing God's slaughters in the Bible to prove that humanity was created in his image, the image of a kiler.

There to stop him is the researcher of the occult and Seward's teacher Dr. Enrico Valenzi(instead of Dr. Abraham Van Helsing) the one who believes that Dracula can be defeated when he faces a strong will enpowered by faith.But throughout this film he raises more and more self-doubts and his will is almost broken by the end.

Its Mina, half-way through her transformation to a vampire, that manages to make Dracula trust her and kills him as he holds her in an embrace.The films end with Mina still having the vampire's mark and how that affects is remain a question.

This film offers a unic take on the legend placed in our modern world , seen as corrupt, who seems to care only about money.Dracula's true power here is the power to make others doubt their beliefs and search for securitie ... in his grasp.Should be seen by those interested in a modern and truly seductive version of the immortal Vampire.

Most people seem to be aware of the Robin Hood legend but have never been interested enough to take a deeper look in it.Most films portraying Robin are adventure-comedies.Robin usually depicted as a super-fighter, the Sheriff of Notingham as a big-bad-bully, Marian as a cheerful lady , Richard as a noble King and John as a foolish tyrant.No other film seems to be inspired by the less-than-merry legends about Robin's last days and no other dares to criticize those stereotypes.

This film uses the tale of Robin Hood's death because of the Prioress of Kirklees and has its own depiction of Richard's death but unfortunately it takes too many liberties to be realistic.I will continue with referring to this film's positive and negative points.They might be spoilers ahead.

Starting with King Richard I the Lionheart.This portrayal is closer to the easily enraged, blood-thirsty king who loved battles and didn't use to spare lifes.Richard's atrocities during the crusades are remembered in this movie and should not be forgotten.His failure to bring back most parts of his army alive is true.Richard was truly mortaly wounded by an arrow during the siege of Chalus, in Aquitaine of France while facing a disobediant subserviant noble who refused to surrender a golden treasure.Richard dying while listening to music was a nice touch since he tryly loved music throughout his life.Those are the good parts of this film's portayal of him.But his portayal as a mad man is definetely not true.Though not among the most succesful Kings of England he was a fine military leader and capable as a politician and diplomat when he tried to be.He wasn't old when he died.Born in 1157 he died on 1199 just 42 years old.He didn't spend twenty years as a Crusader King.He simply didn't have the time.He ruled England for only 10 years from 1189 till 1199 and died while still in his prime.

King John I Lackland's portrayal though brief is fairly accurate.He did spend most of his reign(1199-1216) fighting unsuccesfuly in France, being in conflict with the Pope and facing the Catholic Church.His complain for having to face his brother's legend is true.Richard's shadow was heavy on him throughout his life.Though John was a legend too.The Tudors portrayed him as a heroe for his resistance to the Pope's influence.He was quite a ladies' man too and the film doesn't forget it.Unfortunately the film portrays him as an old man.Born in 1167 he should be only 32 years old during the movie.

Robin Hood is finely portayed as a middle-aged hero, somewhat disilusioned but still obsessed with adventure and living with the memories of his youth.His respect for the Sheriff and his tenderness towards Marian are nicely done.Too bad that some scenes portray him as an almost comical character.A more dramatic take would be more suited.

Lovely Marian as the Prioress of Kirklees was at first a surprise for me.Robin's love and his murderer being the same person?But the film manages to explain it all.This romantic and melancholic portrayal of Marion is flueless.

The Sheriff of Nottingham is portrayed as a somewhat bitter and sarcastic man but true to his duties,a honorable,educated and inteligent adversarie for Robin.He knows his adversarie well and predicts John's ,Robin's and Marian's actions throughout the film.His final battle with Robin when the two aging fighters take their old conflict to the end while younger warriors just gaze is the best scene throughout the movie.The only film probably where the viewer griefs for the Sheriff.

Unfortunately thats about it.No other character comes as nothing else but a card-board one one.Aging and what pain does passing time bring was intended to be this movie's main theme but too much pointless humor and action/comic scenes spoil the movie.

It should be seen by anybody who has an interest in Robin Hood films because this is as close as you get to a serious portrayal of the character in films.For anybody who has already studied the Robin Hood legend as well as the lifes of Kings Richard I and John I it doesn't add anything new.

***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** This movie is about a Haunted House.Not truly original but they get that part right.But what about the characters,the continuity and the motivation? Will South,the star is truly not interesting at all.The only information we get about him is that he used to have affairs.That is impressive,if you are totaly unaware of society.Maura South,the owner of this fine house becomes interesting only when she becomes possesed.She is way too jealous,her husband treating another woman politely is hardly evidence they have an affair,and comes out too shallow.The daughter,Aubrey South,is just annoying.she is a ten year-old.A doll chating to her should impress her.Ten-year olds are usualy smarter than that.Nothing that happens around her seems to effect her.Is she retarded?Father Seamus seems to have studied the occult for some time but he still believes in uncontinional love.Romantic but it has nothing to do with real life or any kind of religion/mythologie. Now some details that kept me interested but where never explained.The house was built on 1863.The couple who built it burried their daughter,Colleen,alive in the celar.They perfomed black magic.The husband's hands were cut off on 1882 by an angry mob and he died during the same year.His wife suicided on 1883.Her husband put a curse in his house.One of his hands struggled a woman in the house.The family maintained ownership of the house till 1996.The house was haunted by Colleen and a number of unnamed others.If those details was explained properly it could have been a nice movie.Why did they have to burrie their own daughter?When did they do that?Why did the man placed a curse in his own house and not in his enemies.How could his wife survive him by a year if the mob was against both of them?Who was the struggled woman?The family continued to live there for a 113 years but the house goes nuts when Maura South arrives.Why?What is Colleen's part in all this? And by the way that they perfomed black magic hardly tells us anything about them and their motivation.So many plot holes ruin this movie.