Giving birth to a snake it’s not all about suicide. It’s probably the most wrong headed thing in all of human endeavour

Director : Various Directorslarge_sk9jhohni5u88smk4njkumcm7er

Year Released : 2016

Starring : Too many to list

Another one from my Youtube “films I want to watch” playlist, “Holidays” is not a film that I’m overly that fussed about if I’m being completely honest. In all reality I should have removed it from that list some time ago because it just never excited me.

However, it was still on there and it suddenly popped up on Netflix. I had nothing else to watch and review, so here you go, a review for a film that I didn’t really want to watch.

Plot

The film is divided into several smaller stories.

Valentines Day (Directed by Kevin Kölsch & Dennis Widmyer) – A young girl who is bullied develops a crush on her swimming coach with disastrous results.

St Patrick’s Day (Directed by Gary Shore) – A new pupil arrives in an Irish school and strangely cradles the stomach of her teacher with her head. The teacher soon finds out that she is pregnant with a snake.

Easter (Directed by Nicholas McCarthy) – A woman tells her daughter about the story of Jesus’ resurrection before bed and promises her that Easter will be the same as last year. During the night an egg rolls into the house and out hatches a demonic Easter bunny that makes the daughter a haunting offer.

Mother’s Day (Directed by Sarah Adina Smith) – A woman can’t stop getting pregnant, regardless of how safe she tries to be during sex. She is directed to a specialist clinic in the middle of nowhere that turns out to be a group of witches. They convince her to carry to term, but they seem to have ulterior motives.

holidays-mothers-day-still-93

Father’s Day (Directed by Anthony Scott Burns) – When she receives a mysterious tape from her estranged father, Carol is offered the chance to re-establish their relationship. She is guided to a seemingly abandoned building…….seemingly.

Halloween (Directed by Kevin Smith) – A man runs an online sex cam business who arrives back at his base of operations and verbally abuses his workers. He is knocked unconscious when he attempts to rape one of them. He wakes up to find a vibrator superglued into his bottom and hooked up to a car battery, and they intend on making him feel as degraded as he forced them to be.

Christmas (Directed by Scott Stewart) – A man leaves it until the last minute to buy the latest in TV technology before he sees the last purchaser of it collapse and die. He steals the box instead of helping the man and takes it back to his ungrateful wife. His greatest desires soon come to the surface however.

New Years’ Eve (Directed by Adam Egypt Mortimer) – Two lonely people get together on New Year’s Eve and it goes awkwardly, but that doesn’t stop them ending up taking it home, little does she know that he is a serial killer…..but he is in for a surprise when he goes in her bathroom.

holidays-movie-trailer-1

Worth watching or not really worth fussing about, as I thought?

Those of you that have read my reviews for “The ABCs of Death”, both the first and it’s sequel, know that the anthology method of dtelling stories in films is very hit and miss. In some aspects you never know what you’re going to get and for all you know you might only have to sit through a few minutes of a story you hate before one you like comes along, but had I known that this was that method of film-making going in then I probably wouldn’t have watched “Holidays”. It’s not a style I overly been impressed with previously, but I certainly enjoyed it more than the two aforementioned movies.

It’s hard to really talk about them as if they are a normal film so I’m going to talk a bit about each. Before you watch this film, if indeed you choose to do so, it’s worth noting that the films are not linked to each other in any way whatsoever other than them revolving around various holidays.

I’m going to start with my favourite aspect of any of them and that comes from the “Easter” story and something that I on’t reference often, character design. The Easter Bunny in this section is genuinely haunting and creepy in it’s design. It’s so simplistic, but it looks disturbing in so many aspects, especially in that it has a very stigmata style appearance, with a crown of thorns and impaled hands. It’s a simple design, but it works. It was kind of unsettling in a very simplistic sort of way.

holidays-easter

I really enjoyed everything about “Father’s Day”, it builds exceptionally well throughout and you feel curious about what is coming next. The ending does feel somewhat predictable, but that didn’t stop me not feeling anything negative about it when it did happen. It is not complicated storytelling, and the tape-recording style feels relatively fresh. Visually it is also the best of the various sections.

“Halloween” is also fairly tense once they start taking revenge on their “handler” (for lack of better words). It’s feels much more justified than much of the “Saw” franchise that clearly inspired it, and the best part is that you feel like the character deserves everything that is happening to him, although it would have been better seeing him deal with the long term effects of what has happened to him.

I genuinely enjoyed a lot of the sections, although I found “Mother’s Day” and “Christmas” to be boring and just underdeveloped. “Mother’s Day” in particular is a momentum killer for the film as everything I had seen before then had been very interesting.

Overall, “Holidays” was much better than I thought it would be. I think it would have been more enjoyable had there been a link between the films other than the holiday seasons. The only bad thing about the better sections was that you get attached to the characters and then they’re gone.

download-2

 

Summary

“Holidays” is a generally decent horror film, that despite it having a few poor sections.approved It is certainly a better-rounded film than both of the entries into the “ABCs” franchise.

I’m going to be generous here and give it the approved stamp. I can see why a lot of people on IMDB (current rating of 5.1/10) didn’t like it, and I think that this will divide anyone that watches it, but for me it works for the most part.

Don’t go in expecting to enjoy every single section of the film. There are sections that in retrospect you’d wished you’d simply skipped through, but there are some that you wouldn’t mind seeing extended into a longer movie.

 

There’s forty-five million pounds of chicken shit dumped into the bay each year!

Director : Barry Levinsonbay_ver2-2012-movie-poster

Year Released : 2012

Starring : Will Rogers, Kristen Connolly, Kether Donohue, Frank Deal, Stephen Kunken, Christopher Denham and Nansi Aluka

I’ve been debating for the last 48 hours whether to actually review this film as I saw that it had a relatively high number of votes on IMDB (more than 20,000) compared to most movies that I review on this site, but then I realised that it might be a while before I get a chance to review another and I don’t want to get into the habit of reviewing one and then taking several weeks off again, so here is it.

I had heard of the film in passing previously but had never actually tried to watch “The Bay” and never even watched a trailer, but then I saw it advertised on Netflix after I had finished reviewing “Land Mine Goes Click” and so I decided to go with it. Little did I realise that it was a found footage film, so I was already anticipating what I was about to watch and not in a good way, but you never know, I had been surprised in the past.

Plot

Donna Thompson (Donohue) is invited to talk about an incident several years prior at Chesapeake Bay in which most of the town dies sudden deaths. She recalls how she was an apprentice news reporter and she believed at the time that she was simply reporting a minor medical issues. It’s peak season at the bay but a lot of people are starting to go into hospital with various boils and infected wounds. Dr Abrams (Kunken) quickly realises that this might be something considerable more drastic when he realises that it is a parasite of some variety that is eating the body from the out and in simultaneous.

Abrams struggles to get an answer out of the government and they eventually start ignoring him as they realise that the town needs to be quarantined. Soon anyone who comes into contact with the water starts falling ill, coming out in boils and mysteriously their tongues eaten.

Can they find an answer in time to save anyone?

the-bay-1-di

So was it worth while or the same as most other found footage films?

I will give “The Bay” praise in that is is different to most other found footage films that I have seen as it doesn’t go with any of the usual stereotypes of the genre. There are no jump-scares, no more . It is also strange to have a narrator most of the way through the film, but this actually causes the main issue that I have with the film…..it nullifies any attachment that you have to the characters.

When Donna is introducing several characters as they appear on screen, she says that they die by the end of that night, meaning that you are automatically disconnected emotionally from them as you know that they are going to “snuff it” within the next hour and a bit. For example, one of the better and more interesting characters to follow is Dr Abrams, but you know from the first minute you see him that he going to die because we’re told it as soon as he appears. Why should I truly care about a character you’ve just told me is going to die.

This isn’t based on an historical event, such as “Titanic” and any set in World War 2, films where you expect most of the characters you see to die, this is a film where, whilst death is likely, it’s not a certainty, and it ruins it somewhat.

the-bay-corpse

The pacing really doesn’t help in this sense and it seems all over the place. There is also one scene in which a character is perfectly fine before he notices he is infected…..and then he dies within 20 seconds. It is either an amazing coincidence that he died just slightly after noticing this, but it feels more like an excuse just to kill off a character as one hadn’t died in a while.

I’m caught in two minds about this because I wasn’t actually bored by “The Bay” at any point, but the problem is that everything feels completely inconsequential. It is unlike any other “found footage” film I’ve seen, which is good in some respects, but in others it just doesn’t work. If it wasn’t for make up and prosthetic applied to create the illusion of flesh being eaten, you’d be forgiven for not really knowing what everyone was getting worried about and this isn’t helped by the lack of a major human antagonist. At least in normal “found footage” films there is something even remotely tangible for you to get terrified (or at least form a vague attempt to be terrified about).

I think that the best way to describe it would be “inconsequential” and in a year or so I will have forgotten that I spent just over 80 minutes watching this, with only the occasional browse through the “All Reviews” list reminding me about it.

the-bay-1

Summary

Whilst it does follow the same formula of most other found footage films, which is something to be commended, it is certainly not as engaging as other movies within the genre and I found it really hard to care about what was happening.

I’m not saying that “The Bay” is a bad film by any stretch, but it’s not good either.

If I could use one word to describe it then it would definitely be “meh”.

 

They don’t save whores!

Director : Levan Bakhialandm1

Year Released : 2015

Starring : Sterling Knight, Spencer Locke, Kote Tolordava, Dean Geyer and Giorgi Tsaava

I had first heard of “Land Mine Goes Click” last year when one of my friends said that they had watched it and they loved it, so my curiousity was automatically peaked, so when it appeared on my Netflix I decided that there would be worse ways to spend 100 minutes of my day off.

It’s also a rare chance to watch a film that is set and filmed in a country that you don’t often see represented in English language films, Georgia. I work with a girl from that country and so have a vague idea about the culture, so it will be interesting to see if it is correctly presented, but giving that these type of films don’t usually do that, I’m not going to get my hopes up.

Why do I get a feeling I’m about to waste 100 minutes of my life?

Plot

Daniel (Geyer) goes on holiday with girlfriend Alicia (Locke) and Chris (Knight), but little does he know that they are sleeping with each other behind his back. The day after an inpromtu wedding ceremony, the group’s tour guide Devi (Tsaava) goes to take a picture of them when Chris steps on a landmine. The guide claims he is going to go into town but quickly stops, and Daniel then fakes a phone call to the emergency services, revealing that he knows about the affair and he purposefully planted the landmine. He leaves and Alicia is forced to try and dig a trench for Chris to jump into.

A few hours later a local man named Ilya (Tolordava) comes along and offers to help, but he wants to all of Alicia’s underwear in return. Although initially reluctant, she eventually agrees, he keeps making increasingly disgusting demands, eventually leading to rape.

Can Chris get off the mine in time?

8

Any good or a waste of 100 minutes of my life?

There are a few films during my life that I have seen in which the mood and tone changes completely, but I’ve never seen a film that skips from one situation to another so abruptly without giving a satisfactory ending to the first one as I did with “Land Mine Goes Click”. To explain this I’m going to have to tell you exactly what happens, to the next paragraph is ALL SPOILER. You have been warned.

So basically you see Ilya raping Alicia, and then the next thing you know you’re at Ilya’s house. Chris suddenly turns up after Ilya dropped his ID after raping her, and he then proceeds to torture the family as revenge. Unless I blinked and missed it, you don’t see Chris get off of the land mine, and you only learn about Alicia’s fate when Chris is forcing Ilya’s daughter to go through the same degrading experience that Alicia had. It’s such a dramatic shift in tone that it makes it feel like another movie all together. You get why Chris is doing what he is doing, but it feels like such an unsatisfactory end to the main storyline of the film.

Right, spoiler over. So yeah, in the opening two acts of the film, I was unsure whether I liked it or not. The film is well presented and you have a feeling of tension as you know that Chris is relatively powerless to stop what he is seeing. It makes you uncomfortable, but the problem is that whilst it achieves that, not once did I feel that excited or engaged by the film. This is probably due to the lack of character development throughout. There isn’t a single character with anything resembling a secondary characteristic, meaning that they are anything but compelling.

I don’t really have too much to say about this film as again, whilst not awful, it’s not great. I’d heard about it being reasonably decent from friends, but for me it’s nothing more than the 6/10 that is the current average on IMDB (well, 6.2 on there but I’ve rounded)

guce9eh

Summary

A somewhat disjointed attempt at a horror-thriller starts off promisingly, but it’s almost as if they weren’t sure how to show Chris getting off of the mine and therefore just decided to skip straight by that part. It’s not a bad film and for a long budget films it is certainly on the better side, but it is most definitely not anywhere near getting my “approved” stamp

Racist? I’m not a racist!

Director : Mick Jacksondenial

Year Released : 2017

Starring : Rachel Weisz, Timothy Spall, Tom Wilkinson and Andrew Scott

Hello again all, it’s been a while hasn’t it? The reason for my lengthy break is due to moving home again recently and not having access to the internet. This means that I haven’t been able to scour Netflix or other sources for less-well-known films, and I’ve had to wait until I got a day off from work when I had nothing planned to be able to sit and write a review. Please note that I still haven’t got broadband at my new house and it doesn’t get installed until Friday, but after that I’m going to try to do a lot of reviews in a short space of time.

But anyway, onto the review.

“Denial” is a film that has been on my Youtube playlist of “Films I want to watch” for a long time, but even then I was genuinely surprised that it got a cinema release in my native UK, but I certainly wasn’t complaining and it gives me a chance to review a new film. It was also surprisingly popular at Leicester Square for a film that’s not well advertised, so I was even contemplating not reviewing it for the site, but I decided to go with it anyway as I don’t think it’ll be a film that the majority will know.

This became the 18th film I saw at the cinema in 2017, and only the second that I’m considering for my Top Ten at the end of the year (I’m currently at 21 for the year), that’s how much I liked it.

Plot

Back in the early nineties there was a war of words between historians Deborah Lipstadt (Weisz) and David Irving (Spall) in relation to whether the holocaust really happened. Irving confronts Lipstadt at a presentation she is giving, and later starts legal proceedings against her due to comments made about him in her book. Weisz spends her time defending herself from not only the press and the London based survivors of the holocaust, all whilst trying to find the proof for her legal team, headed by Anthony Julius (Scott) that Irving is what he appears, a Hitler-sympathiser that is trying to embarrass the Jewish people rather than just another racist.

The case starts with Irving representing himself, and over the subsequent weeks Lipstadt has to prove that Irving has lied on numerous occasions, therefore meaning that what was said was not libellous.

hero_denial-2016

Why is it good?

I’m going to start off with arguably my favourite part of the film and that is the portrayal of the characters. Each actor puts in a great performance of their respective characters, but the stand out character is clearly David Irving, the antagonist. It makes you really dislike Irving as a person, and much like the priests in “Spotlight”, he doesn’t seem to believe what he is doing or saying is wrong. There is a section in which a part of his diary is read out to the court and how he has taught his daughter numerous racist insults, and yet he doesn’t think that he has done anything wrong, and despite hearing what he has just written in his own words, he speaks with all honesty when he utters “I’m not a racist”. You actually believe that he believes that, even though all of the evidence points to the contrary.

I’d be really curious to see what Irving himself thinks of the portrayal of him in the film.

Make no mistake, this is not a film that will gauge the excitement that a lot of other courtroom dramas have in the past, but it is one that builds itself up effectively. Such simple scenes, such as one set in the camp at Auschwitz, give you a real feeling for the wider scale of things. It is a court case that has true implications world-wide instead of just a small scale issue that similar films focus on.

960x410_29b0bf504da1744aaf7d1b29552337af

The subtlety in this film is it’s key attraction, with such simple things helping you build an idea of the character, and one such example of this is right at the end when the court case is over and Irving goes to shake the hands of the opposing side, and they all walk off in disgust. This is an excellent portrayal of what would be a realistic scenario as, if you’d heard a person being racist on such a regular basis for the better part of three months, you’d be very disinclined to shake their hand, regardless of whether you won or not. You can just tell that they all just want to tell him exactly what they think of him, but the simple refusal of a handshake would tell him more than several well-chosen words ever could.

I’ve always struggled with talking about films that I like on here as it’s hard to put into words why I view it with esteem, whereas criticising films is very easy. I’m not going to sit here and claim that this is a brilliant film, because it isn’t quite at that level. It is however a very decent courtroom drama and whilst I will probably never go out of my way to watch it again, it’s one that I would recommend you watch if you get the chance.

If “Denial” is at a cinema near you then I would definitely recommend you spend ninety minutes of your time to watch it.

denial_02

 

Summary

“Denial” is a very good film that focuses on the characters in a courtroom situation, and the fight for the truth, but what I liked about “Denial” is that it showsapproved that the truth is subjective, and this is what makes Irving a very dislikeable antagonist. It’s simple, yet impactful storytelling.

Don’t go into it expecting a twisting plot that leaves you on the edge of your seat, it’s not that in the slightest. What it is however is a movie that will get you emotionally invested and on some levels very angry. I won’t claim to know the ins and outs of the whole case, afterall, I didn’t even know that this was a real case until the film had began, but it got me far more engaged that a lot of similar films did.

This is film-making done right, and whilst it’s nowhere near earning the “perfect” stamp, it’s definitely “approved”.

 

Put that gun down before I shove it down your throat!

Director : Michael Oblowitzthetravelerdvd

Year Released : 2010

Starting : Val Kilmer, Dylan Neal, Camille Sullivan, Paul McGillion, John Cassini, Chris Gauthier and Nels Lennarson

Those that have read the site for a while will know that my favourite film is ‘Willow’ and one of the reasons was the charismatic performance from Val Kilmer as the unwilling hero Madmartigan. I have always found him entertaining, even in movies that weren’t good.

So whilst browsing Netflix I came across this film of his that I hadn’t heard of before and so I got a bit excited. Granted, Kilmer hasn’t, with all due respect, been a major player in Hollywood for quite some time, but that doesn’t stop me looking forward to his releases and even more so given that his last cinema release in the UK came in 2009’s ‘Bad Lieutenant’.

However, those of you who are long term fans of the site might notice that ever since doing reviews of thirty-one horror films in as many days since the build up to Halloween in 2015, I haven’t really reviewed many horror films. This is mainly due to them seeming like a predictable mess. I sincerely hope that this isn’t the same.

Plot

A man (Kilmer) walks in to a police station and calmly states that he is confessing to murder. He remains silent for some time after before he starts playing mind games with various cops. Several start experiencing strange visions and it turns out the man, referring to himself as Nobody, has no fingerprints. Mugshots taken also show nothing more than clothes, and he jumps around from cell to cell with ease.

One of the cops notices that the man looks exactly like a drifter that the same six officers had beaten up a year prior whilst investigating the disappearance of Black’s (Neal) daughter. Minutes later Nobody is describing how he killed his first victim, and as he describes it Jack (Cassini) suffers that fate in the cell block.

As time goes on they realise that every time Nobody makes a confession, one of them dies, and he’s quickly making his way through them.

stv5yk7


A decent showing?

I’m going to start with the only real positive that I can think of for the film that the opening half hour or so. I really liked the build up early on to establish the eerie nature of the movie. It keeps you guessing as to what is happening and how the film will play out. That’s pretty much where my positive review ends.

This is not a good film, not in the slightest. The deaths are the main reason a lot of people get into horror films in the first place, but the body count here feels so lazily done and realised that it is hard not to notice the flaws in the various aspects of them. Once such death comes when one of the characters is trapped in a car and the remaining survivors are struggling to break through the windscreen. Whilst noble in their intentions, the characters are fucking idiots. They must have pumped at least fifteen bullets from different guns into that windscreen, and hitting it with their batons, all without making a slight dent. Surely they’d realise after two/three shots that the glass should have broken and then try in another area?

 

The ridiculous nature of the deaths is pretty much the same all of the way through, with the jump-cut nature of one or two of them, not to mention the obscured view for others, makes it hard to really get a true sense of what is going on. For example, one character is killed on a rooftop, but because it is heavily raining you can’t really tell what is going on.

thetraveler2

For lack of a better words, the long this film goes on the more boring it becomes. I really don’t like describing a film as boring, but unfortunately there are no other words that would be considered appropriate. After thirty minutes I was contemplating going against the 4.1/10 average on IMDB and giving this the approved stamp, but then it lost everything that made it even remotely interesting. This isn’t helped by all of the wooden acting on show from everyone. No-one seems to be enjoying the film making process, and their performances just don’t inspire anything that could be considered noteworthy.

I still enjoy Kilmer’s work, but even he seems exceptionally bored by the movie judging by his passive portrayal during the film’s ninety-one minute run time.

As the film goes on it gets less engaging as you don’t feel sorry for what is happening to the characters. They deserve what they are getting, and even the twist towards the end doesn’t really change that. It’s hard to really get behind these characters to survive and in the way that “Don’t Breathe” presents its central characters. They are pieces of shit so it is hard to feel sorry for them in the slightest.

I’m going to end this review by talking about the ending and how stupid that is. I shouldn’t really have to say this after just saying that, but SPOILER ALERT. Basically the only character left is Black, the father of the girl that they all believed was killed by the man they beat up the previous year. He decides to make himself deaf so that he can’t hear the confessions anymore, but this doesn’t work as he can still hear Nobody. He all of a sudden sees his daughter and it turns out that to defeat Nobody, all he has to do is say his name out loud. He does and then shoguns him through a window. What a poor way to end a film that was rapidly going downhill anyway.

Summary

What starts off as a reasonable horror film slowly turns into a snorefest that I struggled to find a single positive out of.

I can barely even muster the energy to come up with a summary, that’s how boring and forgettable this film is.

If you must insist on watch it, stop after the half hour mark, because fuck all interesting happens after that.

Every apocalypse deserves an after-party!

Director : Steve Barkerthe-rezort-1-500x760

Year Released : 2015

Starring : Jessica De Gouw,  Dougray Scott, Martin McCann, Elen Rhys and Claire Goose

You know when you see a trailer for a  film and you know exactly what films have influenced it, that’s basically the cast with “Rezort”. It doesn’t take a genius to see that this is clearly inspired by the “Jurassic Park” franchise and is basically the exact same film, but with dinosaurs replaced by zombies. As you can probably tell, I’ve actually watched the film before starting this review, which is very rare for me as I tend to want to do just the opening section first, and leaving the rest until afterwards.

I’m not going to say at this stage whether I liked it or not, but it would appear that if I do then I would comfortably be in the minority as “The Rezort” currently has an average rating of just 5.1/10 on IMDB from just over one thousand votes, comfortably a low ranking film.

So, before I get onto telling you whether I joined the majority, or was in the minority, I suppose I should tell you about the plot.

Plot

Several years after a worldwide outbreak of a zombie virus was finally stopped, one woman (Goose) saved several of the zombies that were created on an island just west of Africa. The resort, called ‘Rezort’, allows people to take their frustrations out on zombies, but one of the guests (Rhys) implants a virus into the system and it causes all safety measures to fail. All of the zombies are suddenly free to roam the island.

A group of tourists are trapped out in the park and their guide realises that ‘Brimstone’, a weapons based purge of the island, has been implemented and they only have a few hours to make it to the dock for a boat that is supposed to get staff off of the island. This is made even trickier when all staff on the island are killed, meaning that virtually no access routes to the boats are actually free.

rezort-film1-h_2016

So, am I in the minority of people who liked it?

Whilst I will say that there were the odd bits here and there that I did like, I am definitely more in the camp that don’t like this film.

Now let’s address the obvious, this is basically a zombified rip of off the “Jurassic Park” franchise, right down to even minor things. Now don’t get me wrong, finding inspiration from another film is not a bad thing, afterall, my favourite film “Willow” has obvious inspirations from the “Lord of the Rings” novella by J.R.R. Tolkien, but unlike that “Rezort” doesn’t use that well.

Here are the similarities/blatant rip offs;

  • There is a boat that takes the staff members off of the island
  • There are fences separating large areas of the park
  • The computers are struck with a virus by someone who seemingly merges into the background
  • None of the other supposed computer experts can fix this
  • The characters end up in the control centre, trying to avoid those that are eating them
  • The characters go out into the park in a safari jeep
  • There are two annoying youths who are the only people competent with computers in their group.

I could go on and I’m sure if I was making a list as the film went on then I could easily fill a A4 piece of paper.

the-rezort

The problem with this film is that is feels completely unoriginal and doesn’t offer anything that I haven’t seen before. Everything, even the bits which aren’t a blatant rip off of Jurassic Park scenes, feel like something that I have seen numerous times before and it’s hard to really get excited about watching it. Infact I would go as far as saying that whilst I wasn’t bored, I certainly wasn’t enthralled.

This isn’t helped by a bunch of stereotypes that are portrayed as characters. For example, Dougray Scott’s “Archer” is given little, if any, character development or story. He is just this guy that is a sharpshooter, rarely missing, but I couldn’t tell you a single thing about the actual character outside of this characteristic. In many ways he is similar to the character of Muldoon in “Jurassic Park” but without any semblance of a secondary characteristic. For example, Muldoon is quite clearly a very stern and to the point character, but he is humanised by a clear fear of the dinosaurs, especially the raptors, but Archer just seems to take everything in his stride. It feels effortless.

Deaths feel completely uninspired and out of the blue. There is very little tension created in the build ups to several the death of some of the characters, and the zombie attacks sometimes literally came out of nowhere.

download

Summary

Even if you can ignore the blatant rip of the “Jurassic Park” films then you’e still unlikely to join a film that will feel very familiar. There is very little originality in the run time of this film and in the end I found myself not really caring about the fate of those on the screen.

There isn’t any real tension or anything remotely resembling a worthwhile plot.

As it’s on Netflix at the moment it’s not like you’ll need to go out of your way to watch it, but I would certainly not actively recommending that you select it for playing compared to the other zombie films that are currently on there.

Director : Pearry Reginald Teocurse-of-sleeping-beauty-poster

Starring : Ethan Peck, India Eisley, Natalie Hall and Bruce Davison

You know when you see a film advertised that would be perfect for the low budget TV station ‘The Horror Channel’ in the UK but it has somehow found its way onto Netflix? That’s what you have with ‘The Curse of Sleeping Beauty”.

Even just looking at the Netflix image I get the feeling that this is going to be a horrible film. I could be completely wrong, but it basically just looks like a gothic version of the “Sleeping Beauty” fairy tale, but done with very little skill or affection. It does look visually distinctive, but it takes more than just looking ok to actually be a good film, and I get a feeling that in several hundred words, when I start the summary section, I won’t be overwhelmed by a great film.

I hope I’m wrong, but I doubt I will be.
Plot

Thomas (Peck) has been having a recurring dream in which he sees a beautiful woman (Eisley) sleeping, but he wakes before he can kiss her. One day he gets notified that an unknown uncle has died and left him a large house, using the word ‘curse’ several times in the process. The letter urges him to never go into the basement, but Thomas has very little intention of keeping the house and gets it valued.

Soon after first entering the house he dreams of the woman again, but this time he is able to kiss and wake her. She says that she is somewhere in the house and needs to be awoken in the real world so that they can be together. Thomas finds himself no longer able to stay away from the house for a few days without getting deathly ill, but he can’t stay there for long as an evil spirit has now awoken.

thecurseofsleepingbeauty_trailer1

 

So is this destined for “The Horror Channel”?

I have little doubts that this will end up on that channel as it is without doubt their type of horror film. Don’t get me wrong, I love “The Horror Channel” but there is little doubt that the majority of the films on there aren’t that good, so “The Curse of Sleeping Beauty” suits that perfectly. I am genuinely surprised that Netflix picked this is up.

The main problem with “The Curse of Sleeping Beauty” is that is completely lifeless and has precisely zero charisma. It’s just kind of there. Ethan Peck is a poor leading man and whilst India Eisley definitely has the look, especially in the final few scenes, her acting leaves a lot to be desired. I love that the film actually tries to look great, such as actually using camera podiums and tripods (therefore avoiding the problems of on the shoulder cameras shaking all over the place), and the lighting is actually great, but no-one that appears on screen will come out of this movie with any kind of positive credit.

There is very little to keep you interested in the film, and nothing sums that up better than the fact that after about fifty of the eighty-six minute run time, I was able to leave my house and go to the shops to buy a drink. There was no urge to see the film all of the way through, and one of the reasons for this was that not only is the story told in a boring way, it is exceptionally predictable. I was able to call the ending from near enough the beginning of the movie, and not just the obvious part of him finding her in the real world.

I really don’t know what more I can say about this film. It’s far from the worst film that I have ever watched, and it’s certainly not anywhere near as bad as a lot of the films that I have reviewed for this site, but that’s the only praise that I can really give it.

dsc_7101-h_2016

Summary

Poor-acted snorefest that looks great, but has very little else going for it.

The cast is full of people who probably have a history of modelling, but have no acting skill to back up their looks. That sums up the film really. Visually decent but with nothing to back it up. It’s filled with jump-scares and predictable plot points that make it more tedious to watch. Even at a mercifully short eighty-six minutes, “The Curse of Sleeping Beauty” definitely drags.

Just don’t waste your time.

 

I’m a lean, mean, joint-smoking machine!

Released : 2015being_charlie_poster

Director : Rob Reiner

Main Cast : Nick Robinson, Cary Elwes, Devon Bostick, Morgan Saylor, Susan Misner, Common and Ricardo Chavira

Firstly, my apologies about the gap since my last review. I was hoping to post this review last week but I’ve spent most of that time at week and ill.

Another film from my Youtube list of films I want to watch, I am looking forward to what will hopefully be the first decent film starring Nick Robinson that I have seen. He has been in “Jurassic World” and “The Fifth Wave”, neither of which were great. He is one of a growing number of young actors that seem to constantly get roles despite not seemingly having any emotions. Having said that, I’m happy to give anyone a chance and to be fair to Nick, two bad films doesn’t necessarily make him a bad actor, so here we go.

I like stories about redemption, as well as deep and complex characters. Some of my favourite characters in movie history are those that are multi-layered and aren’t simply one-dimensional wonders. There appears to be something relatively unique about this given that the character seemingly doesn’t want to be redeemed, but feels the need to.

I’m not claiming that it is a completely new concept, but at least it’s trying something slightly different, and I applaud them for that. Having said that, the reviews I’ve read have not been good at all, so

Plot

Charlie (Robinson) leaves his rehab centre on his birthday and promises his parents that this time will be different, all before stealing the prescription medicine from the mother of a guy giving him a lift. He does eventually get back home but is sent back to rehab within minutes as his father (Elwes) is scared that he will ruin the Governors election campaign that he strong favourite for. Charlie only agrees due to convincing from his drug-taking accomplice Adam (Bostick).

The extremely disgruntled Charlie quickly makes friends at the new rehab centre, and finds himself developing a romantic relationship with the emotionally unstable Eva (Saylor). The two work their way out of the rehab centre and into half-way houses, although they are actively denied spending time with each other, although they can spend time away from the houses together with the permission of their parents. Charlie’s mother (Misner) gives permission for him to do this and the pair make their way to a beach house for a romantic get away, but can both of them stay away from the drugs, or will old habits return?

charlie4f-1-web

 

An improvement on the usual Nick Robinson offerings?

Robinson is considerably better in this film than some of his previous efforts and I think that’s because he has found a character that has some depth to him, which is something that can’t be said for most of his other efforts. There is a scene towards the end of the film *spoiler warning* in which the character has reached such a low that he ends up taking drugs again, but even as he’s doing it you can tell that he’s trying to convince himself not to do it, and Robinson captured that very well.

That scene was the moment I realised that I liked the movie as I found myself thinking “don’t do it” and I felt very personally disappointed that the character had decided to undo all of his hard work. The thing is that you understand where he is coming from at that point in the story. I won’t reveal why he gets to that point, but you understand, even if you don’t agree.

Without revealing what it is, the reason you understand is because the film, whilst not pacey in any sense of the word, develops the characters quite well, including the minor characters, and that relationships between them are explored more than most similar films. The relationship between Charlie and Eva is fairly interesting as well and the reason for this is that you can never figure out her motivations or what she is thinking, and whilst the two have a natural connection, they never look like they will ultimately end up together due to her insecurities. In some ways the relationship is similar to Scott and Ramona from “Scott Pilgrim vs the World”, but with the insecurity being in the opposite gender.

mecl

As mentioned above, the film doesn’t have any pacing whatsoever really, it is very much a character driven film and I can imagine that this would turn a lot of people off. For me I’d rather have a film that takes its time to have a developed set of characters, rather than something happening every single minute and yet you don’t care. For example, most of the horror films released these days fall very much into the latter. They will spend the time trying to increase the body count as quickly and violently as possible, but they don’t take the time to get you to care about the characters that are being killed.

Whilst they’re not fully fleshed out characters, you get to know quite a few of those staying at the rehab and half-way centres that Charlie and Eva are at, so you get to see what each is like interacting with others when each other isn’t around. What makes this even better is that the conversations when they’re with other people don’t revolve around the other person, which is another common trend in movies. The problem with a lot of films involving a romantic angle is that when either side of the relationship are away from their partner, that’s all they can talk about, whereas “Being Charlie” doesn’t go down that route, thankfully.

The only issue that I really have with “Being Charlie” is that it is somewhat predictable in terms of the relationship between Charlie and his father. The ending feels a bit unoriginal and whilst the majority of what was before it was fresh, the final ten or so minutes was nothing that I hadn’t already seen.

I do also find it funny that the rapper “Common” appears as one of the main cast, even though his character has maybe five minutes of screen time. It’s not even as if he is a well known name in the acting world, especially not well known enough to be credited as a main cast member.

screen_shot_2016-05-03_at_6-11-02_pm

Summary

Don’t get in expecting a fast-paced look at the world of drugs in youth culture because you’ll be expected. Infact, if you’reapproved expecting nearly 100 minutes of anything even vaguely similar to other films where the taking of drugs is a plot point then you’ll also be disappointed, but if you are after a film that builds its characters to the point where you become emotionally involved them and their decisions.

I’m not going to lie, I’m being a bit generous by giving this the approved stamp because for the majority I wasn’t really sure whether I liked it or not. I loved that it was developing the characters, but there just wasn’t a lot happening and you are waiting for long periods of time for the story to move along somewhat.

Still, give it a watch and I am giving it my approved stamp because it is ultimately a decent film and one I think that those who read my reviews on a regular basis will enjoy for the most part.

Sometimes I think I am invisible!

Released : 2015backtrack-01

Director : Michael Petroni

Main Cast : Adrian Brody, Robin McLeavy, George Shevtsov, Sam Neill and Chloe Bayliss

The longer term readers of this site will know about the Youtube playlist that I have that contains films that I want to watch and review (if small enough and unknown enough to warrant being on this site), and one of the longest serving videos on that list was the trailer for this mystery/horror movie starring three actors I generally enjoy watching.

One of the three is Robin McLeavy, who was magnetic as the dangerous and mentally disturbed Lola in “The Loved Ones”, one of my favourite horror films that I have reviewed for this site (I’m now in a mood to simply rewatch that instead). If you ever get a chance to watch that movie then I would highly recommend it.

But anyway, yes, this is a film that I have been wanting to watch for a while and as I’m determined to do more reviewing than I did in 2016, I thought I’d start working my way through the aforementioned list properly, and the first one that I was able to locate was this after trying a few at random. Rest assured that all on that list will be watched at some point or another, and potentially reviewed, with maybe the exception of “Zon 261”, which I heavily fear will never actually be made.

But anyway, let’s see if this was worth the wait.

Plot

Peter (Brody) is a psychiatrist who has recently moved to try and move on from his young daughter dying in an accident. There he inherits new patients from friend and mentor Duncan (Neill). One day he gets a visit from a mute girl named Elizabeth (Bayliss) who says nothing before leaving a note that simply reads “12887”, however, when researching Elizabeth, he realises that was the dates of her death, 12/8/87, and more worrying, all of the new patients that Duncan gave him also died around that date.

He approaches Duncan about it, but it turns out that his friend has also been dead for some time and also died on the same date as the others. Peter decides to revisit his old town to try and recover mentally. Peter runs into his old friend, but they soon argue bitterly about it and Peter becomes even more riddled with guilt as he realises that all of his patients were passengers on board a train that the two accidentally derailed when they were teenagers.

Feeling guilty, Peter goes to the police station to report the incident to officer Barbara Henning (McLeavy), daughter of one of the victims of the train accident. Peter is soon visited by the ghost of Duncan again, but it turns out there is more to the death of his daughter, and the train accident, than meets the eye.

backtrackrev

Worth the wait?

In short, no.

Don’t get me wrong, there are some decent bits about the film, such as the element of Peter being partly responsible for the deaths of all of those people who he was given as patients by Duncan, adding a great level of depth to the character, but the problem is that the film is largely boring.

I don’t like using that word when describing films of any variety, but it goes to just over half an hour into the film and it dragged so badly that I just wanted it to be over because it was just tedious. The film is presented in such a lifeless, unimaginative way that it is really hard to get invested in the movie, characters or indeed the intended emotional depth that they try to bring to the film.

“Backtrack” starts off interestingly enough, and it’s slick and stylish in it’s presentation, but realistically it gives you the twist of the train journey, and then another twist, and another, and another, so much so that it made writing the plot summary above quite tricky.

backtrack1

Then again, the film is so concerned with fitting in as many twists and false-revelations that it be hard to shoe-horn that in. Whilst it wasn’t hard to follow, “Backtrack” definitely became tedious the more it went on as it kept changing things. For example, in the space of seemingly a few days, Peter goes from meeting the character to Elizabeth to practically handing himself in to the police for something he hasn’t been able to admit since his teens. If you’re going to evolve your story, at least make it feel natural and not forced beyond the point of having no sense of realism.

By the time you get to the final twist of the film, the point of having a twist has lost all realistic meaning and when it is revealed what really happened on the night of the train wreck, you no longer care because it is just yet another twist. The best twists, and by that I mean the ironic ones, are ones you don’t feel are coming, such as the ones in films such as “Fight Club” and “The Sixth Sense”, but one of the other reasons they’re so effective is because they don’t have a twist every fifteen minutes or so.

But anyway, back to the characters and the rest of the story. Every emotion feels false and unnatural, other than those revolving around Barbara when she realises that Peter caused the accident that resulted in her mother’s death. McLeavy is unsurprisingly charming, although she isn’t given the chance to show her full range of an actress with a largely uninteresting script.

The thing is that no-one is actually putting in a bad performance. I can’t look at a single performance and say that they were bad, but ultimately there is only so much that good actors can do with a film that tries to be more than it is. I believe a quote from Christopher Lee sums it up quite well, “Everyone is in bad films, the key is not to be bad in them”.

“Backtrack” is a film that I never intend on watching again, and I can’t think of a single reason to recommend it to you.

Oh, and by the way, if you’re going to watch this because you’re a Sam Neill fan, don’t bother. His screen time is five minutes, at most.

146

Summary

“Backtrack” certainly tries its hardest to be a unique psychological horror film, but it fails to get the basis premise of a horror film right, in other words, make it interesting. There is a great level of emotional depth in the near ninety minute run time, but this is countered by a largely dull and lifeless script.

No-one is actually bad in this film, it’s just a bad film. There are too many twists and false “true” versions of what happened that by the time you actually get to what has happened, you don’t really care, and no film should ever make you not care.

Australian cinema has much better films to offer, so if you’re going to watch one then please watch something else.

When we start something, we finish it!

Director : André Øvredalautopsyofjanedoe

Starring : Brian Cox, Emile Hirsch and Olwen Kelly

So after taking a few days to rest after writing more than 35,000 words for my end of year review, I decided to jump at the chance to watch “The Autopsy of Jane Joe”, a film that I saw the trailer of some time ago.

This film is one that is actually seemingly known on an ok basis in America as it has a decent amount of votes for a relatively new film, but over in my native UK I couldn’t find anyone that had even seen a trailer, so when I got the unexpected chance to watch and review it, I thought why not.

Readers of this site will know that I’m not really big on horror films, they’re overly predictable and easily replicated. There are very rarely any horror films that I find entertaining, and there was only one release at the cinema in 2016 that I found interesting and that was “The Witch”, which finished at number eleven in my top one hundred.

What looks interesting about “The Autopsy of Jane Doe” is that I can’t recall seeing another film like it, so there is an least a seeming originality about it, and I that proves to be correct.

Plot : Austin (Hirsch) and Tommy (Cox) are a father/son team of morticians that are given an unusual case one night. The body of an unknown woman (Kelly) is wheeled into their autopsy room after being found buried by several layers of soil. There are no outwardly obvious signs of anything that would kill her, although her wrists and ankles are both fractured. What makes it even more obvious is that despite being dead for seemingly some time, rigor mortis has not set in, and bloody rushes to the surface when they cut into her to start the autopsy.

Despite being perfectly normal on the outside, the body is beaten, bruised and heavily scarred on the inside, with lungs that are more burnt that someone who smoked consistently for thirty years, and a rag contained within her intestines that is perfectly in tact, that despite the fact it should have been easily dissolved by the stomach acid.

Pretty soon unusual events start occuring, such as doors opening by themselves, people being seen in panoramic mirrors that simply aren’t there, and more worrying, electricity failing around the building, trapping the pair inside.

1150-sboximg

So, is it original and a surprisingly good horror movie?

There is definitely something different about “The Autopsy of Jane Doe”, and whilst there is a reliance on jump scares that seems overwhelmingly familiar, there is the uncommon element of suspense that you don’t get often in the genre. I found myself intrigued by what was on show throughout the film and it is very far from boring. You’re there with the characters throughout, learning as they learn. The film feeds you bit of information in pieces, meaning that you never have the full picture as an audience member until the end. This is different from a lot of horror films that give you too much information early on.

I think that is one of the problems with a lot of horror films these days, they’re too keen to get the information to you that there is no real way to actually feel like the next surprise could be just around the corner. For example, there were quite a few horror films in the 80-71 section of my look at 2016 and not a single one of them tried to build as it went along, with only the first and third act really proving even remotely (and I do use that word very generously) interesting and good for development, whereas “The Autopsy of Jane Doe” concentrates on building the two central characters in the first act, and having the second and third acts to build momentum and establish the information.

It would be hard to think that a film set largely in one room and only has two characters (well, characters that are alive at least) that feature prominently could be as intriguing as I’m making it sound, but it is like an 86 minute puzzle, and each piece makes you more curious, so much to the point where it isn’t until the very end that it all fits together. Whilst the ending is a little out there, it certainly isn’t predictable and I never saw it coming, nor the origins of the body. It was very refreshing to be surprised by the ending to a horror film.

Cox and Hirsch make an interesting double team and whilst I don’t believe for a second that they make a convincing father-son combination on screen, they do at least have a decent enough chemistry, which is again something that can be rarely said about some other films from the genre.

My only real issue with “The Autopsy of Jane Doe” is the aforementioned jump scares, which are most definitely used to no real benefit to the story. They have made it tense in places with other scenes, such as when you can hear the bell tagged to a corpse slowly ringing closer and closer, but they then counter that with unnecessary jump scares.

Oh well, can’t have everything.

janedoe-thumb

Summary

It’s nice to start 2017 by giving my “approved” tag to a horror film, which is somethingapproved that I don’t do often.

Whilst “The Autopsy of Jane Doe” is far from perfect, the aspects that make it like a puzzle that needs to put together sets it apart from most other horror films that I have seen recently. You learn as the characters learn, and you certainly aren’t force-fed information like a lot of horror films.

This is certainly one of the better efforts in the genre in recent years.