Change Your Image
soulful01
Reviews
No Knock List (2019)
They're too old to be kids...
This is a video taped (not 35mm film) low quality movie that must have been put together by a community group, not necessarily a theatre group, that way overrates their skills. I truly don't like trashing someone's work, but this was just bad all the way across the board. Even if they were trying for intentionally bad, it doesn't succeed. While credit is due for pursuing their dream, this is an example of why some wacky ideas that have been floating around in the back of your mind are probably better left there. Not all ideas are good ones, and not all ambitions deserve to be fulfilled. Yes, life is short, so put that time into something worthwhile beyond just killing time.
What We Do in the Shadows (2014)
Better than I expected.
While this is a low budget film, the actors are talented, several are well regarded stand-ups, and their talent shows. The improvised filming format played to their strengths, and the film plays really well as a mockumentary. While I wasn't falling on the floor laughing, I found the movie to be funny, enjoyable and well worth watching. The main actors are current well known artists, in New Zealand, and they have a fresh but polished approach. The special effects were surprisingly well done. The situations they end up in are pretty creative, and the writers know their vampire lore. There are a number of these tongue in cheek monster movies that have been produced in recent years, and this movie rates among the better ones. It's well worth taking the time to watch.
Night Creature (1978)
Good for a quick flick
First of all, if you're writing a review and clearly don't know who Nancy Kwan is and her place in film history, you can forget pretending you know what you're talking about. That said, I agree this is not an award winning film, but it's good entertainment, which as I recall, is kind of the idea behind show business. It's a good made for TV movie, even though it was made for the SE Asia film market. At the time, and as far as can see to this day, every film had a love interest angle. This film didn't show the actual love scene, but implied it with a kiss. In the conservative SE Asian media market at the time, this is not surprising. There definitely could have been more hunting scenes, and the movie did seem hurriedly edited with a lot of choppiness from one scene to the next, but this was a budget film and not a Hollywood blockbuster. The version we see may be the one that was distributed after the Thai censors had a go at it. I don't know. All I can say is that for the $3 I paid for it, I thought it was a good movie with Donald Pleasance and Nancy Kwan, two of my favorite actors, in it. The 2 adult character actors are respected and performed well. The kid was annoying, but aren't they all? For those of you who obviously didn't exist in the 1970s, you really need a better understanding of the different culture and history of America's previous decades if you want to make commentary, and hope to make a career of it, on the films and other entertainment mediums of the time. I do recommend this film.
Rapid Assault (1997)
Terrible
I watched this as a RiffTrax which made it bearable and enjoyable. This is not one of their movies I'd have enjoyed without the commentary. It's a formula production, and even though it's a B movie, does it really take that much time at the library (this was the 90s) to get a few facts straight? It's not even a good Saturday afternoon movie, although an earlier poster felt differently. While it meets the definition of a movie, I wouldn't call it entertainment. There are better ways to spend your time. Believe me.
Beyond the Seventh Door (1987)
Watchable if you're also doing something else.
In no way does this move ever approach anything like good. I've seen productions by HS kids that were better. There was no acting, just people standing in front of a camera delivering lines like they were reading recipes out loud. The writing, again, I've seen better from HS students. This whole movie had the feel of a film school project from a not an "A" student. All of that said, I still found it mildly entertaining with a surprise twist at the end. No, I won't spoil it for you, you'll have to watch it for yourself. Why should we be the only ones to suffer? Seriously though, if you have an hour to kill it's definitely watchable, as long as your sorting your coupons, folding laundry or engaging in some other mindless task. There is a mild sense of curiosity at what the next room will be, but you're more than likely to laugh rather than jump when you see it. And the stone, brick and concrete walls are somewhat less wooden than Lazar. The corpse really was the best actor, as a previous reviewer mentioned. If you're not a fan of bad movies, there's nothing to recommend this one. If you enjoy B or worse movies, give this one a try.
Jason X (2001)
The Naysayers Are Wrong.
I enjoyed this movie enough to purchase it, and I've watched it at least 3 times. I'm a fan of both Lexa Doig and Lisa Ryder, who've swapped roles here with Lexa being the strong female lead and Lisa playing the android. The pace is great, the actors are professionals, a number of whom have hopped around quite a bit in both film and television, and regularly find work. Plot? Seriously? It's a Friday the 13th film staring Jason Voorhees. If you have the nerve to call yourself a film aficionado, why are you watching a slasher film series that began in the 1970s? And yes, I was there at the beginning. These films are made for entertainment and to make money. It's called show business for a reason. Frankly, I think this is the best film of the series since the first one, which broke new ground for horror at the time. This is a 90 minute B movie that's meant to be an entertaining story. It's not Star Wars, nor is it the film that will change lives and how we view the world. It's just some escapism. A mental vacation to get away for a little bit. Keep the film in perspective and enjoy!
The House on Pine Street (2015)
A decent film.
I think the negative reviews are from people who didn't understand the film. They have a template they use for "horror" and aren't able to judge the film beyond that. This is a psychological horror film, not a slasher film. If gratuitous violence and torture are your thing, then don't bother with this one. If you like some depth and thought into the human psyche, give this one a shot. Throughout the film the overwhelming point is that the female lead doesn't want to be in Kansas and doesn't want to be a mom. Her only concern is what she wants, not what is best for her husband and his career, their family or their child. There was no ghost. It was her PK energy in essence creating poltergeist activity. Walter at the end summed it up beautifully, and her mother put the bow in it when she told her daughter, you finally got what you wanted. This film was about a very self-centered woman who cared only about herself and was willing to do whatever and sacrifice everything else to get what she wanted. Once you understand that, the rest of the movie becomes clear. The film made clear there was no reason for the house to be haunted. She was the center of the storm.
The Smudging (2016)
Stinkburger
Wow, I wanted this movie to be at least watchable being a Chicagoan and familiar with the AIC and Uptown, but this didn't make it. Even with allowances being made for a low budget indie production, this movie stank. It's not the absolute worst film I've ever seen, but by every benchmark for filmmaking it didn't make the grade. If you want a list, watch the film and make your own. There are creative, well done, low-budget indie films out there. This just isn't one of them.
The Fog (2005)
I liked it.
I don't know why people are trashing this film. I thought it was pretty good, on par with a made for TV film. The story held together pretty well, though about 9 or 10 minutes could have been shaved without affecting the story much. The acting, the action, the score, and everything else was fine. This remake was not as good as the original, but what remake is? And while I freely admit this film will never be on the AFI's top 100 list, it doesn't need to be. It's entertaining, and that's exactly what it's meant to be. I have to wonder what's going on with the low ratings. For a movie as unheard of as this one, there are an awful lot of comments. But that's a matter for someone who cares to look into. A nice little not too horrible horror film that would be perfect for a rainy evening with a bowl of popcorn covered in real butter.
Terror in the Wax Museum (1973)
Enjoyable & Atmospheric Old Mystery-Horror Film
This was a great old movie, with a stellar cast of veteran horror actors. The pace is nice, the story holds together, and it was all done without CGI, gratuitous violence, or sex and nudity for the sake of it. I missed this film when it first aired when I was a kid, and enjoyed the chance to watch it now. If you like old house mysteries, this is an excellent example of the genre, and great for when you just want to relax with a good old movie.
Incident at Loch Ness (2004)
Somebody light a match!
Wow, did this movie stink. I understand what they were trying to do, so spare me the comments from the "artsy" crowd. No one gets it right every time, and every director has their share of bombs. Unfortunately, this movie was one of Herzog's. Yes, it's a mockumentary, and was supposed to be tongue-in-cheek, but did they view this thing before releasing it? I get that there were inside the industry nods and jokes, and that the film had multiple layers, etc. But it moves at a glacial pace, and really feels like a half hour film that was stretched to 1 and a half hours. You have to watch the clips embedded in the credits to get a true sense of what they were going after. Unfortunately, that also emphasizes how far they missed the mark.
The Dead Files (2011)
Great show!
This is actually an original and amazing idea for a very old genre. Steve and Amy work very well together, and you can tell that they get more comfortable working with each other as the show progresses. I don't know if Amy's abilities are real or not, and who cares? This show is way better than the shows where plumbers, models, etc. spend an hour dropping the F-bomb while scaring themselves and yelling at nothing. Amy and Steve have devoted their lives to being professional seekers of truth, and have the credentials to back that up. It's not a hobby, or something that sounded like a good idea at the time for them. They also don't need to use pseudo-scientific nonsense to try to give themselves credibility.
To the critics: First, Amy is a PHYSICAL medium, so she feels a lot of what she's seeing, and that's partly why her genuine facial expressions appear on the show. Also, if you've watched the Travel Channel videos of her days out, she's just naturally a bubbly and animated person.
Second, yes, she's been on other shows, which actually establishes her bona fides rather than discredits her. She stated clearly in the episode of A Haunting that she was a physical medium in addition to being a paranormal investigator. The two are not mutually exclusive, so try and think outside the box.
Third, if you knew anything about producing a show, you'd know that many hours of footage never make it to TV. Amy and Steve work independently, and the show's very talented editors later add the background music, etc., and they edit the many hours worth of footage down to about 42 minutes. That's why they are able to show Amy and Steve uncovering their findings as the show progresses. It's called the magic of television. You're not watching a live show. Try and think outside the box, OK? Basically, just enjoy the many locations in America they visit, and the stories that people have to tell. I've purchased the available seasons of the show, and the Revisited episodes as well. If you don't like the show, that's your right. That doesn't require trashing the show simply because you don't understand TV production, or have personal issues with the cast.
This show is awesome!
Maigret: Maigret and the Maid (1993)
An excellent mystery program for mystery lovers
I don't think this is a spoiler, but a previous review dated the show as being in the 1930s, but it's actually set in the 1950s. The casket of the victim clearly has 1955 engraved on it. Other than this slight factual error, I agree with the previous review. This is a pleasant mystery program done well. The acting cast is strong, and many can be seen on other British TV programs. Maigret's doctor for instance appears in Rosmary and Thyme as well as Midsommer Murders. Jane Wymark from Midsommer Murders also has a brief appearance in Maigret and the Minister. There are others as well. The directing, scenery, and writing all come together very well. I never once doubted I was watching a French policeman from the fifties. I know the book has Maigret being somewhat hard-boiled, but the TV show has a thoughtful and compassionate detective that's far different from the American PI novels written at the time. I wouldn't call the show a cozy by any stretch, but the sex and violence are kept to a minimum. As an observation and not a criticism, I thought it was a bit humorous at first to hear supposed Frenchman speaking with British accents, but this was after all made for TV in Britain. :)