Change Your Image
![](https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BMjQ4MTY5NzU2M15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwNDc5NTgwMTI@._V1_SY100_SX100_.jpg)
monkeybrainspit
Reviews
Prince of Darkness (1987)
"I've got a message for you and you're not going to like it."
When a key to an underground church basement is found on a dead priest, another man of the cloth sets off to find what is hidden within. With this new discovery, the father seeks the help of a local scientist and his research team.
The thing you'll notice immediately (apart from the insanely long opening credits) is the wonderful cast, of whom I wish I could write all about individually, but their on-screen presence speaks for itself. There's a great chemistry between the characters and the story unfolds with suspense because of it. But that's not to take away from Carpenter's great story-telling of this under-rated horror.
You can't help but feel the experience should be better though; like there's a small fragment missing which could have made it a masterpiece. At times it seems to take on a different pace altogether, as though the film becomes more mechanical and rigid along the way. But when it reveals its greatest moments it feels like Carpenters best work.
Direction: 8/10 (Carpenter eases into the story slowly but picks it up in the second half) Cinematography: 8/10 (Gary B. Kibbe brings the kind of expected look to this 80's creep fest) Editing: 9/10 (Mirkovich proves again that he is the go to man for great editing) Acting: 10/10 (Fantastic choice of actors. Enough said.) Dialogue: 7/10 (A little heavy on the B.S for me.) Sound: 9/10 (Solidly mixed tracks brought in at the right moments.) Effects: 9/10 (More than effective attempt to create an awesome ending.) Art Direction: 7/10 (The back-drops were all quite obvious from the get go.) Costumes: 8/10 (The team put together costumes that work great with each character.) Music and/or Score: 9/10 (Carpenter and Alan Howarth provide a great eerie score.)
Total Score: 84/100
A well chosen cast more than make up for the over-used reverse photography and cliché 'end of the world' dialogue. Then again, I loved all the cheesy science talk and apocalyptic banter.
The Lincoln Lawyer (2011)
"This whole thing is a set up."
When savvy, quick-minded, lawyer Mick Haller (Matthew McConaughey) is handed a case for a high-profile client he quickly heads to the holding cell where the man is being held. On introduction, the man pleads his innocence and convinces Mick to take his case. But Mick quickly begins to question the man's true motives.
It's nice to see McConaughey return to form. At his best he can take a character and add some great complexities – this is one of those characters. So it's easy to forget about his bad films when you watch him in this one. And with co-stars like Ryan Phillipe, William H. Macy, Marisa Tomei and John Leguizamo, you can't really go wrong.
Aside from the shaky camera work at the beginning, some very wise choices are made by Brad Furman to help progress the story. Some great music accompany the drives including tracks from Bobby Bland, Eric B. & Rakim and Gangstarr.
Direction: 7/10 (Brad Furman could go far but still has a long way to go) Cinematography: 8/10 (Lukas Ettlin needs to refine his technique but it still looks great) Editing: 8/10 (Jeff McEvoy brings back some cutting reminiscent of his 'Wonderland' efforts) Acting: 9/10 (Matthew McConaughey reminds us of his acting skills with a great performance) Dialogue: 10/10 (I love the banter between McConaughey and his different clients) Sound: 8/10 (Some nicely compiled audio tracks) Effects: 9/10 (Intelligently done with nothing over the top) Art Direction: 10/10 (Well chosen to suit each scene and the team deserve recognition) Costumes: 7/10 (Some obvious choices bothered me but well put together nonetheless) Music and/or Score: 9/10 (If Rap is your preferred genre of music you'll love this soundtrack)
Total Score: 85/100
As far as legal dramas go, this one will grab your attention pretty quickly. A real treat to watch and a nice pace of action to keep you intrigued. If only McConaughey's character was real – he'd talk anyone into watching it.
Paranormal Activity 2 (2010)
"Hey! Who left the front door open?"
Shortly after the birth of their new son, a family arrive home one day to a trashed house. Although nothing is stolen, they seek the expertise of security professionals and install various surveillance cameras around the house as a deterrent. But the cameras record odd occurrences that turn this film into a creep-fest.
Without wanting to spoil anything major for those of you who haven't seen it yet, it's certainly hard to believe that a family wouldn't be more distraught about a trashed house. There's something a bit too blasé about their reaction that bothered me early on. When you're watching a movie filmed to look like a 'real event' these small details always matter.
But aside from nit-picking small details it's hard to write about this film without mentioning the first. Sequels are, more often than not, built on the same formula as the original and this one is no different. A bigger budget obviously helped bring the realism to life but the premise and quality are almost identical; and there's nothing wrong with that for what they are trying to accomplish.
Direction: 7/10 (Tod Williams builds up a creepy feel throughout the film, but that's about it) Cinematography: 8/10 (Michael Simmonds dumbs achieves an authentic realism) Editing: 8/10 (Gregory Plotkin did well to stick with Oren Peli's formula from the first) Acting: 6/10 (Brian Boland fleshes out his character more than the others, but this doesn't save it) Dialogue: 5/10 (Not that noteworthy but enough to seem like their a part of the film) Sound: 8/10 (In a story where sound is everything the team does a quality job) Effects: 9/10 (They scared me enough not to watch it without the light on) Art Direction: 7/10 (The connection to the first film is obvious when you see the set) Costumes: 8/10 (If anything they add to the authenticity) Music and/or Score: 9/10 (The various sounds create an eerie ambiance to set the tone)
Total Score: 75/100
It doesn't take long for the horror to start. The film gets to the point quicker than the original and that's its way of refining the formula. If horror is your forte and you prefer a good scare as opposed to mountains of blood, this will be right up your alley. Let your imagination connect the dots and just enjoy the creepiness.
Planet of the Apes (1968)
"Take your stinking paws off me, you damned dirty ape!"
When three astronauts awake from hibernation, they discover their ship has crash landed in the middle of a lake. With the ship sinking, they make their way to dry land and set out to explore the surrounding area. But what they find is so unexpected it changes their lives forever.
Charlton Heston was at his prime when cast for this film. Without such a dramatic actor the film might have suffered at the hands of another. But Heston along with a great crew made this film a memorable experience.
The costume and makeup department really went to town on this one. Once again, as I have commented with past reviews on, the lack of C.G allows for an almost dead art to be appreciated again.
Direction:10 /10 (Franklin J. Schaffner really does create such an epic design) Cinematography: 10/10 (Leon Shamroy makes some beautiful decisions with the camera) Editing: 10/10 (Hugh S. Fowler's transitions are infallible) Acting: 9/10 (It's easy to see why Charlton Heston was such a wanted actor at the time) Dialogue: 9/10 (Pierre Boule's novel is adapted so vividly with great care) Sound: 9/10 (I love the way the music just cuts in abruptly to accentuate certain scenes) Effects: 10/10 (Amazing effects that allow for the imagination be a part of the ride) Art Direction: 9/10 (Superb sets and desirable designs implanted so well) Costumes: 8/10 (Eye catching attire which blends in but, in any other setting, would stand out) Music and/or Score: 10/10 (Such a memorable score from this era of film)
Total Score: 94/100
I enjoy any film that allows my imagination to be active while watching. I find, with many modern films, so much is shown and explained to the viewer – as if we're too dumb to work it out ourselves. What a horrible insult to the audience. I recommend this to anybody who has recently experienced that insult.
The Prestige (2006)
"Are you watching closely?"
Set In the 19th century, this film tells the tale of three friends. Robert Angier (Hugh Jackman), his wife Julia and Alfred Borden (Christian Bale) are assistants to a magician. When a water tank trick goes horribly wrong, Robert and Alfred become bitter rivals in the magic industry, trying anything to ruin each others illusions.
With one of the best cast line ups in recent years, there's not much chance of losing interest in the stories' characters. I can't single out any one performance because they really do each have their own evocativeness. The film is so consistent with beautiful sets & imagery it really is a feast for the eyes.
It's hard to find something wrong with this film. Christopher Nolan is one of the best Directors of today, and this film is more than proof of it. It seems to have been handled with such care. There's chemistry between all the elements and no scene is less than spectacular.
Direction: 10/10 (Christopher Nolan knows how to keep an audience from looking away) Cinematography: 10/10 (Visually stunning, such depth in those rich undertones from Wally Pfister) Editing: 10/10 (Lee Smith's sequences are well executed and fitting for drama) Acting: 9/10 (Some minor things may bother you, but not enough to keep you from enjoying) Dialogue: 10/10 (Some very well thought concepts are conveyed through the dialogue alone) Sound: 10/10 (The huge sound team put together a phenomenal recording of pristine quality) Effects: 9/10 (Well coordinated effects which are seamlessly integrated into the film) Art Direction: 10/10 (Realistic sets and props really nurture the film's aesthetic) Costumes: 10/10 (Very fitting, excuse the pun, for the period) Music and/or Score: 10/10 (Lovely orchestrations which give life to moments with no dialogue)
Total Score: 98/100
The Prestige is an enchanting film with some subtle charms. David Bowie's small role as Nicola Tesla is also something to make note of. If you can allow yourself to be drawn into the world of magic then this is a film you will live.
Return to Oz (1985)
". . . maybe this is Oz"
Dorothy Gale, now back home in Kansas, still dreams of her adventure in Oz. Concerned with her detachment from reality, Dorothy's Aunt takes her to see a doctor at a mental hospital where electro-therapy is the preferred method for curing delusions. At the moment they are about to hit the switch the power cuts out and Dorothy escapes only to find herself back in Oz. But something has changed and this is not the Oz she remembers.
I loved this film as a child. Faruiza Balk really does do an exceptional job of playing Dorothy. She was only 10 at the time and apparently did all her own stunts in the movie. Another noteworthy performance is the powerfully voiced Nicol Williamson, whose performance as the Nome King really catches the audience's attention.
Many make comparisons to the 'Wizard of Oz' but this film is actually more faithful to L. Frank Baum's books with some fascinating characters that have to be seen to be believed. And though it seems to be for children, I think you'd be hard pressed to find any young adults that wouldn't find it appealing.
Direction: 8/10 (Walter Murch does a fantastic job on his first and only attempt as Director) Cinematography: 8/10 (The sometimes creepy aesthetic is an appealing match for Murch's style) Editing: 7/10 (A rushed project for Leslie Hodgson) Acting: 8/10 (Lovely characters were handled with passionate performances) Dialogue: 8/10 (Nicol Williamson's delivery, as the Nome King, is chillingly commanding) Sound: 8/10 (A bit late on some obvious queues, but pretty good quality for the 80's) Effects: 9/10 (The art of puppetry is dead, but this film is a reminder of its charms) Art Direction: 8/10 (The team definitely gave this Oz a unique look and feel) Costumes: 9/10 (Some fantastic likenesses to the original character designs from the books) Music and/or Score: 9/10 (Very well suited enchanting music, especially in the final sequences)
Total Score: 82/100
It's always nice to take a break from today's C.G infested films. Watching this film will make you appreciate the lengths film crews went to, to create talking animals and animatronics. So grab your ruby slippers and enjoy a short but sweet interpretation of a children's classic.
The Boy in the Striped Pajamas (2008)
"We're not supposed to be friends, you and me. We're meant to be enemies. Did you know that?"
Bruno, the son of a Nazi commandant, is made to move house on account of his father's new promotion. On arrival at his new residence Bruno spots a mysterious farm behind his house which sparks his curiosity. Unable to resist the urge, Bruno sets out to explore and relieve his boredom.
Vera Farmiga steals the show as Bruno's mother Elsa. Her struggle to come to come to grips with her husband's new role is heart-breaking and authentic. Some of the issues are confronting but handled with dignity by Director, Mark Herman.
The film draws on emotion more than anything. The cast have a great chemistry and it's this part of the film that will attract you the most.
Direction: 10/10 (Mark Herman's unravelling of the story is delicately done) Cinematography: 10/10 (Benoit Delhomme achieves some elegantly vibrant tones and movement) Editing: 10/10 (Michael Ellis transports the audience into the child's world with ease) Acting: 9/10 (Vera Farmiga is simply captivating in her role as Elsa) Dialogue: 7/10 (Riveting performances aided where the screenplay lacked) Sound: 8/10 (There's a rawness that feels like it's missing from some of the outdoor scenes) Effects: 8/10 (Some safe decisions and nothing is exaggerated) Art Direction: 7/10 (Although some sets look too prettied up, the overall feel is quite appealing) Costumes: 8/10 (Some well detailed uniforms bring authoritativeness to the soldiers) Music and/or Score: 10/10 (Beautiful piano medleys merge beautifully into the film)
Total Score: 87/100
Many films have been made on the pivotal subject of this film. Most use the pain and suffering as a tool to make a strong point but this film never gives up on its true meaning – friendship and innocence.
La Belle et la Bête (1946)
"Il était une fois . . ."
Belle (Josette Day), one of four siblings, slaves away in her home day and night while her two older sisters happily spend their father's remaining fortune. Having lost his merchant ships at sea, the father (played by Marcel Andre) is on the brink of losing it all. In learning of an opportunity to repair the damage, Belle's father takes to the road but not before being requested for a rose by his over-worked daughter. On his journey, Belle's father stumbles upon a hidden castle and takes a rose. Unhappy with this act the castle's owner, a beast, provides him with an unusual ultimatum.
It's the little things that get me excited about watching this classic. Cocteau's message in the introduction; the politeness to ask of the audience '. . . a little of this childlike simplicity', referring to his belief that 'children believe what we tell them'. Also, the subtle pans on a passing subject like an eye being momentarily distracted from its main focus.
Everybody knows the tale of Beauty & the Beast, but Cocteau's interpretation brings with it a sincere beauty very rarely seen in cinema. To describe it as anything less than perfection would be to do it injustice.
Direction: 10/10 (Jean Cocteau is truly a master of cinema. His work speaks for itself) Cinematography: 10/10 (Henri Alekan truly captured Cocteau's vision with confidence) Editing: 10/10 (Claude Iberia merges the imagery seamlessly) Acting: 10/10 (Jean Marais' captures the beast's fragility and Josette Day nurtures it) Dialogue: 10/10 (Beautifully poetic, as was common with many European films at the time) Sound: 10/10 (The well balanced sound creates a divine ambiance) Effects: 10/10 (Easily ahead of its time and executed with such accuracy) Art Direction: 10/10 (The castles aesthetic is hard to dislike. Every set is painstakingly perfect) Costumes: 10/10 (The team naturally encompass the Beast's powerfulness and Belle's purity) Music and/or Score: 10/10 (Auric's work is mesmerising to say the least. A perfect accompaniment to this lovely fairy tale)
Total Score: 100/100
I really could write several pages on the real beauty – this film. Cinema lovers beware, you will fall in love with the beauty.
Total Recall (1990)
"If I am not me, then who the hell am I?"
In a time when interplanetary travel is common, one man yearns for better things. Douglas Quaid (Arnold Scwarzenneger), discontent with his life, dreams of vacationing to Mars. When an opportunity for a virtual vacation presents itself, Quaid visits Rekall Inc. for a memory implant. But during the procedure Quaid is plagued by memories of another life and heads to mars to try to unravel a forgotten past.
When David Cronenberg passed on the project, director Paul Verhoeven, of 'Robocop' fame came to the rescue. And although I will always wonder what the talented Mr. Cronenberg would have pieced together, I think Verhoeven deserves credit for taking on the challenge. The film's look is a trademark of Verhoevens and doesn't shy away from being loud in appearance.
The film was adapted from Philip K. Dick's 'We Can Remember It For You Wholesale' and poses a question to the audience about whether the events after the memory implant are real or not. Undertones of corruption pull the movie along, but Verhoeven's execution of these issues is done with little care.
Direction: 7/10 (Verhoeven's anti-subtle imagery and erotica influences drive this film) Cinematography: 8/10 (Jost Vocano's improves Verhoeven's excessive influences) Editing: 9/10 (Puente & Urioste make the right choices here, especially in the Johhny cab scenes) Acting: 6/10 (It's Arnie & Stone. What did you expect? Michael Ironside does most of the work here) Dialogue: 5/10 (Too many hands spoiled this broth. Not awful, just disappointing it didn't turn out) Sound: 10/10 (I was impressed for a film made in 1990. This almost makes up for the dialogue) Effects: 10/10 (It didn't get a 'Special Achievement Award' for nothing. An Oscar well deserved) Art Direction: 8/10 (Verhoeven favourite James E. Tocci is called again to help the director) Costumes: 7/10 (Erica Edell Phillips gives the characters another subtle dimension) Music and/or Score: 7/10 (The music department provided a tasteful Sci-Fi feel to the film)
Total Score: 77/100
For a film with plenty of action, explosive sounds and visual effects it still delivers an entertaining experience. But don't be fooled – this film is not for anyone. Best suited for Sci-Fi aficionados and 80s action film buffs. Memorable moments included.
Evil Dead II (1987)
"Groovy . . ."
When Ash (Bruce Campbell) decides to take his girlfriend, Linda, away for a romantic weekend he gets more than he bargained for. Upon playing a tape in the cabin they're staying at, Ash releases an unseen force which brings the forest to life – and his weekend to a halt.
Sam Raimi, now with a bigger budget, decided to employ all the over the top effects he couldn't afford when he directed the original. This remake/sequel is as good as it gets for most horror aficionados, but many argue its existence was unnecessary. It's the film that started Sam Raimi's career and a step into Hollywood for Bruce Campbell's chin (inside joke).
The first film was made on a shoe-string budget and quickly reached cult status due to its creative use of very little. The second had a lot to live up to and it's not hard to see why the team were happy to rehash it.
Direction: 9/10 (Sam Raimi is hungry for it. You can see him forming as a director) Cinematography: 8/10 (Peter Deming really used every part of the budget to make it work) Editing: 9/10 (Fantastic combination of shots to over-animate the performances) Acting: 8/10 (Bruce Campbell is the capital B in B-Grade acting. Loved every minute of watching him) Dialogue: 7/10 (Sam Raimi and Scott Spiegel ) Sound: 7/10 (Some great original concepts here) Effects: 9/10 (Not as impressive as the first, taking into regard the budget, but just as effective) Art Direction: 9/10 (Randy Bennett & Philip Duffin never let it go flat throughout the film) Costumes: 7/10 (Vicki Graef & Randall Ouzts did a good job fitting different styles to each character) Music and/or Score: 6/10 (The music was a bit choppy in many parts and not very powerful)
Total Score: 79/100
The chemistry between Raimi & Campbell is what makes this such a treat to watch. Their hunger to explore new territory and courage to experiment is motivation enough to get any amateur film maker excited. If you like fun films and feel like a quirky horror, you've come to the right place.
Freaks (1932)
"One of us! Gobble, gobble . . ."
The central plot revolves around Cleopatra, a trapeze artist, who has a plan to seduce Hans, a freak in the circus sideshow, after learning of his large inheritance. When Hans' fiancée, Frieda, learns of Cleopatra's mal-intent she tries desperately to warn her better half. Unsuccessful in her attempt, Hans leaves her to marry Cleopatra but the other freaks have different opinions of the new wife.
The 1930's was considered the beginning of the 'Golden Age' of Cinema. It was a time when talkies took to the screens and horror films got a good run. It was during this run that Tod Browning was "asked for something horrifying" by MGM's Head of Production. "And I got it" responded MGM's Head upon viewing the final film.
'Freaks' is so much more than just another horror. Some would argue it's a character piece about acceptance and greed while others would simply state its sole purpose was to be controversial. Whatever your view, it certainly has a firm place in cinema history.
Direction: 9/10 (Tod Browning creates some unforgettable images) Cinematography: 8/10 (Half the budget of the Oscar-winning 'Grand Hotel', but Gerstad delivers) Editing: 8/10 (A good effort by Basil Wrangell, especially in the climax) Acting: 7/10 (Not its strongest point, but certainly doesn't take away from the films purpose) Dialogue: 7/10 (Again, not one of the films strong points. Not all the cast were trained actors) Sound: 7/10 (Although voices were a new thing at the time, the engineer made the film work) Effects: 9/10 (Seeing as there really weren't any, I'll give this rating to the second unit) Art Direction: 9/10 (The sets were a joy to look at and connect the audience to the characters) Costumes: 7/10 (The small team put together some memorable outfits) Music and/or Score: 6/10 (The music, or lack of, missed some essential dramatic queues)
Total Score: 77/100
The film went into obscurity for almost 30 years until, in the 60's, it was revived. I'm thankful for the revival and the opportunity to watch this unique staple in early cinema. An amazing cult classic and well worth any film-lovers time.
District 9 (2009)
"They must just go. I don't know where, but they must just go!"
A large alien spacecraft hovers above Johannesburg in South Africa. When a team enter to investigate they find millions of malnourished extraterrestrial inside. MNU, a military company and weapons manufacturer, build a ghetto district to segregate the alien race. But after large protest from locals, prepare to relocate them to District 10.
Sharlto Copley's performance as Wikus Van De Merwe is iconic. There's a sort of 'over the top' kind of feel to his performance but it works oh so well. And the film's documentary element also gives it a great spin.
For a Sci-Fi, this film is easily amongst the best I have ever seen and that's saying a lot. The plot, set design and effects all play a pivotal role in this film, but it's the main character who will surprise you the most.
Direction: 7/10 (Slightly rushed. Neill Blomkamp relied too heavily on effects toward the end) Cinematography: 10/10 (Trent Opaloch made this film an eye-catching experience) Editing: 9/10 (Changes in style from the documentary portions to the action were fantastic) Acting: 9/10 (They played the parts they were given, and that's that) Dialogue: 6/10 (I'd say the performances helped bring out what was lacking in this area) Sound: 9/10 (This film sounds fantastic in cinemas and at home. Be sure to listen in 5.1 at least) Effects: 10/10 (So well integrated – like Wikus's alien arm.) Art Direction: 10/10 (Mike Berg brings his 'Lord Of War' touch to the set) Costumes: 10/10 (All the costumes in the film looked fantastic) Music and/or Score: 10/10 (Clinton Shorter's soundtrack deserves to be nominated. Oh, it was)
Total Score: 90/100
There seem to be so many mixed reviews on this film. Some feel it's the best thing since sliced bread, while others feel it's about as exciting as watching paint dry. I wouldn't recommend it to non-Sci-Fi fans but I do urge you to watch it and form your own opinion.
El método (2005)
"Quién es el topo?"
A major corporation holds a group interview for 7 candidates who must determine who among them is the mole and an employee of the company. Through computer monitors set up in front of each interviewee they are told to exercise their opinions and decision making skills on who must stay and who must go.
With a fantastic cast made up of Eduardo Noriega, Najwa Nimri & Eduard Fernandez, the actors seem to equally share the spotlight - and deservingly so. Reminiscent of '12 Angry Men', the entire film plays out within the confines of the interview room.
The Method (English title) is as good as a psychological thriller gets. It seems to draw you in almost immediately and wastes no time in playing tricks on the audience in the same way the plot plays games with the characters. It's beautifully constructed and doesn't seem to have many flaws at all.
Direction: 9/10 (Marcelo Piñeyro does a superb job on keeping us on the edge of our seats) Cinematography: 8/10 (Alfreod Mayo's vision supports Piñeyro's cold stern corporate look) Editing: 8/10 (Ivan Aledo lends a hand in keeping the film from feeling repetitive) Acting: 9/10 (The impressive cast's interaction with each other was a pleasure to watch) Dialogue: 10/10 (Adopted from a play, the script provided wit and suspense) Sound: 9/10 (The quality of the film's sound was exceptional) Effects: 7/10 (The computer screens felt like they should have had a more ominous film) Art Direction: 8/10 (The sets distinct look is proof a fantastic collaboration) Costumes: 10/10 (The personal touches for each character were seamless) Music and/or Score: 7/10 (Not the most memorable part of the film, but a part nonetheless)
Total Score: 85/100
It's a film you cannot help but draw your own conclusions to while watching and I doubt anybody could resist wanting to express their own views on the topics discussed. A brilliant character piece and an intense thriller.
Shark Attack 3: Megalodon (2002)
"Megalo-who?"
When an unusual Shark tooth is found off the Mexican Coast, 2 researchers band together with a. . . lifeguard?; to rid the world of the gigantic menace it belongs to.
This is the kind of B-Grade Horror you have to laugh at. With lines like the one quoted above, and acting that will make you clench your teeth; you just know you're in for a night of hilarious pain. Kind of like when you hit your funny bone.
After my wife & I first watched it we turned to each other, at the end of the film, and knew we had to screen it to other people. Thus, 'Megalodon Night' was born. A large group of close friends attended the B-Grade fest and it was one of the funniest experiences I have ever shared with a film.
Direction: 2/10 (David Worth...wait, didn't he do 'Kickboxer'? What happened, dude?) Cinematography: 2/10 (David Worth again. Give him a break, he was tired from directi...never mind) Editing: 2/10 (Kristopher Lease seems like he should stick with TV series) Acting: 2/10 (John Barrowman should get an Oscar for keeping a straight face during those lines) Dialogue: 2/10 (Scott Devine & William Hooke basically ripped this off a book called 'MEG') Sound: 1/10 (These guys definitely didn't put in any overtime. Absolutely awful mix-down) Effects: 3/10 (I'll give the Special Effects team something for effort) Art Direction: 3/10 (At least the rich snobs looked like proper tools. Great job!) Costumes: 4/10 (The tuxedos on those snobs was the icing) Music and/or Score: 3/10 (Ashley Miller's sound couldn't even be heard due to poor effort from the sound department)
Total Score: 24/100
I don't want to spoil what could potentially make you choke as you laugh so I'm not going to mention the Shark looks like they had a budget of $5 for CG. Anyway, if you can bare it, it's a great piece of awfulness. All I can suggest is to do what I did. Make a night of it and just enjoy it for what it is . . . or what it isn't for that matter.
The Serpent and the Rainbow (1988)
"Don't let them bury me! I'm not dead!"
Anthropologist Dennis Alan (Bill Pullman) embarks on a journey to Haiti in search of a drug said to be the cause of zombification. Thrown into a world of superstition and surreal bedlam, the good doctor digs deep to find answers.
Loosely based on a true story, this tale of rising corpses and scientific endeavour takes us on a genuinely creepy ride. Bill Pullman does a great job of leading the film and brings a noteworthy authenticity to his character. It's also worth mentioning that Zakes Mokae's performance as the villainous Dargent Peytraud is quite chilling.
Since as early as I can remember, Zombie films have always fascinated me. A good zombie flick should be able to make you question it. Where would you hide? How would you kill them? And could you survive? Wes Craven did well to stay away from walking dead clichés and ask the mother of all questions – Is it real and how far would you go to find out?
Direction: 8/10 (Wes Craven keeps you interested with relative ease, thanks to the story) Cinematography: 7/10 (John Lindley's choices were simple, but effective. Editing: 9/10 (Academy Award winner Glenn Farr keeps us on our toes) Acting: 7/10 (Bill Pullman and Zakes Mokae do a great job in their parts) Dialogue: 7/10 (The screenplay was well drawn out, for the most part) Sound: 6/10 (Works well enough to please the audience) Effects: 10/10 (Some genuinely creepy looking corpses will keep you watching) Art Direction: 7/10 (One of David Brisbin's more memorable achievements) Costumes: 8/10 (Peter Mitchell's vision suits the film and the actors) Music and/or Score: 6/10 (Brad Fiedel provides enough to satisfy)
Total Score: 75/100
On release it was competing with The Blob, Child's Play and Critters 2. Wes would have known what the industry was looking for but stuck with it. Not his best work but Horror/Thriller fans will like it for what it accomplishes.
Videodrome (1983)
If you fiend for a perfect balance of Fantasy and Sci-Fi, Videodrome delivers.
"Civic TV. The one you take to bed with you." are the first words blaring out of the television in Max Renn's apartment – the occupier seeming to take the quote almost literally. Max runs a TV channel during the day and seems like he doesn't get much of a break from his duties at home.
Max Renn, played by the legendary James Woods, is always on the lookout for new cheap erotic thrills to broadcast on his channel and finds what he is looking for when he is called by an employee to view a transmission for a show called "Videodrome".
Obsessed with trying to get the series on his channel, Max inadvertently reels in his girlfriend Nikki Brand (Deborah Harry) to it's bizarre sado-masochistic wonders and is caught between his want to know more and his fear in its meaning.
Direction: 8/10 (David Cronenberg keeps pace with our emotions and intrigue as he draws us in) Cinematography: 10/10 (Mark Irwin keeps Videodrome seeping out of our TVs for the duration) Editing: 8/10 (Roland Sanders delivers once again, as he did with the Fly, intensifying every shot) Acting: 8/10 (James Woods gets help from great performances by Peter Dvorsky and Sonja Smits) Dialogue: 9/10 (Most of the time Cronenberg's script just wants to get straight to the point) Sound: 9/10 (Michael Jay does a great mix-down of all the elements) Effects: 10/10 (Rick Baker, involved in "American Werewolf...",makes part of a uniquely creative team) Art Direction: 10/10 (Carol Spier authenticates Videodrome's creepiness with matching sets) Costumes: 10/10 (Delphine White makes it all work with simple 80s fashion and a touch of bad) Music and/or Score: 10/10 (I'm looking for more of Howard Shore's work after hearing the main theme)
Total Score: 92/100
The cast was well chosen and, surprisingly, suits James Woods perfectly. It really is an enjoyable experience and doesn't bore you with too much dialogue or cheap scares. So prepare to get your Fantasy/Sci-Fi fix and let Videodrome into your mind's eye.
Cujo (1983)
"There's no such thing as real monsters...". Or is there?
When 5 year old Tad Trenton's imagination gets the better of him his parents come to comfort his fears of lurking night creatures by offering those aforementioned words of wisdom.
Tad's mother (Dee Wallace) and father are having some marital issues which make for good enough reason to send the father off and leave mother and son helpless to fend off the attack from Cujo, a rabies-infested St. Bernard. Stephen King definitely changed my mind about those cuddly piles of fur with this story.
Horror films always have more of an effect on me when they are realistic in nature. Knowing the events could actually occur make for a tense story. As for the telling of this one, Cujo is intentionally slow in its build up - a little too slow, for me.
Direction: 7/10 (Lewis Teague knows how tell a climax. It's the rest of the story he needs help on) Cinematography: 5/10 (Jan De Bont gives you nothing more than what you'd expect to see) Editing: 6/10 (An above mediocre effort from Neil Travis) Acting: 7/10 (Performances aren't particularly bad. Even Cujo himself does a decent job) Dialogue: 5/10 (The screenplay has a few holes in it, but doesn't overly spoil anything) Sound: 9/10 (Probably my favourite part of the movie. Awesome job) Effects: 6/10 (Less than impressive, but enough to make the story believable) Art Direction: 6/10 (Enough to get the job done) Costumes: 6/10 (Not awful. Nothing memorable) Music and/or Score: 9/10 (Awesome effort, Charles Bernstein- A Nightmare On Elm Street)
Total Score: 66/100
Not that I didn't enjoy it . . . but get to the point already. When the plot eventually thickens, the acting and directing begin to work for the film but it seems almost too late. Worth a watch in my opinion – but don't go out of your way. Oh, and don't even get me started on the ending.