Change Your Image
tcollins2005
Reviews
30 Days of Night: Dark Days (2010)
Fercockt...
I had no problem whatever with the concept of a "Thirty Days of Night" sequel, else-wise I never would have rented it, but the people who approved it, never mind those who "wrote" it, must've been towering idiots. How the *bleep* do you title a movie "Thirty Days of Night" and then set it in Los Angeles? There's not even 24 hours worth of night in L.A. for *bleep*'s sake, never mind thirty days.
I understand they were capitalizing on a title that already had some mojo, which I do not have an issue with in principle, but if you call the picture "Thirty Days of Night" you have to be capable of supplying THIRTY...DAYS...OF...NIGHT. If you're incapable of maintaining the premise you, yourself, have set in the title of the movie you need to either not write the movie or change the title, end of sentence!
The Collector (2009)
Complete Drek
I have no complaints about cinematography, casting, yadda, yadda, yadda. I don't even have a problem with the basic premise. In fact, that's why I plucked it off the shelf in the first place.
What I do have issue with is the crap-at-best story. I don't even care about the rude/nasty objections the Hollywood-can-do-no-wrong people on this site will muster. This is drek at its finest. I mean, a mystery psycho/serial killer is able to enter peoples' home and string all sorts of ridiculously elaborate, booby traps (razor wire spider webs, nail- studded boards, golf-club-triggering multi-room snares, bear traps, etc
) throughout the whole place—both floors—and board up the upper windows with razor blade-lined boards whilst they're there? Aye, por favor!
Even if he secured the adults before beginning his weird trap-setting rampage, he had to be aware that there was a kid loose in the place. What self-respecting serial killer is going to start playing with his new toys when there's a potential hazard, like an unaccounted-for kid, running lose in the place? One that gets caught on his first hunting trip, that's who. If he had any brains at all, he'd be intimately familiar with every member of the family and know exactly where each one is supposed to be on the night he's going to hold his party. The fact that he didn't account for/secure the youngest child tells me he was under informed
read, idiotic
read further, idiotic writers, for whom I have no patience.
I could not even watch the whole thing, which is saying something as it takes a profoundly horrid movie to make *me* turn it off. This picture might have some redeeming value if the government were to put it to work as psychological warfare against militia/terrorist groups
otherwise, I would steer far and wide were I you.