Kaos' way behind movie reviews

[Kaos]

Two random Australian movies

Watched two movies over the weekend.  Both Australian.  Both attempts at horror.  Both horrific.  Both so badly done I can't remember their names. 

I had to go look them up. 

Killing Ground was the first. 

Two weirdo psychos 'hunt' unsuspecting campers near an ugly, dirty stream in some random Australian forest. 

It had some disturbing elements -- a callous attempt to murder a baby, a naked and raped 16-year old, some cavalier violence. But there was never any true payoff because the characters were superfluous and there was no emotional attachment to any of them.  Included weak ass protagonist who crumbles under pressure and fails to do any of the normal things a movie hero would be expected to do.  The entire story was undone by underdeveloped characters, muddy motivations, a confusing (for a while) bounce back and forth in time, and some bad performances. 

I might have rated it higher if the ending weren't such a complete cop out.  If I wanted to write my own endings to movies, I'd just write the whole movie and watch it in my head.  It would be better than this.

Open Water 3: Cage Dive
Horrible "found footage" movie about a trio of overacting assholes who travel to Australia seeking the adventure of getting in a shark cage to see Great Whites up close and personal... and then... gasp!1.... the unthinkable happens. 

I was openly rooting for the sharks to eat these jackfucks and get this thing over with.  Hated all three major characters and their ridiculous love triangle that played out in the open sea. 

The sharks were the best actors in this film.  By far.  I'd let a shark eat me rather than watch this one again. 

[Kaos]

Aftershock

Eli Roth is supposed to be the king of gore horror.  He's developed a reputation for on-screen brutality in movies like Cabin Fever, Hostel, Green Inferno (reviewed in this thread), Last Exorcism and 2001 Maniacs. 

What he is, however, is a low-rent hack.  This piece of predictable crap confirmed it. 

Horrible effects, stilted acting, fakest blood you've ever seen, ridiculous time gaps and "plot twists" that Stevie Wonder saw coming were the hallmarks of this terribly done piece of crap.  The guy is terrible.  I could have written a better movie.

The film starts with three assholes partying in Chile.  One of the assholes is apparently the son of somebody important so they get into all the best parties.  But their efforts are wasted because one of the assholes is stupidly and annoyingly pining over a cheating girlfriend and the other asshole has no game.  The gameless asshole is portrayed by Roth himself in a brilliant casting decision. If by brilliant you mean shitty.

The one asshole whose dad is somebody is a weird-looking chubby little turd.  Kind of a Zach Gaffilnaniakiisa retread but without any of the talent and a mouth that would fit a gar.  Hated him.  He was also murdered in Green Inferno.

So the three guys party.  They connect (who knows how) with a trio of whorish chicks.  There are two sisters and their Ruskie friend.  The Russian you might have seen in a lesbian romp called Habitación en Roma. If you're into that. 

One of the other whores who overacts to the point of distraction is Roth's wife.  You might have seen her playing a whore in Green Inferno or a whore in Knock Knock (with which Roth was also involved). 

The third whore doesn't matter.  She's Hungarian (playing the sister of a Chilean) who hasn't done anything you'd know.

So after the extended party sequences, interrupted by some of the worst acting imaginable, there's an earthquake.  Then people run amok. Throw in a severed hand, an immolation, an ax murder, two gratuitous rape sequences, a pair of bare male asses, some ridiculous dialogue, a couple of gunshots and some illogical gaps (Run, they're right behind us!!! Wait, let's have this extended stupid scene at a gate!! Ok, that's over. They're right behind us!!)  and you've got a stinking turd of a movie.   

The fact that the big "surprise" reveals were so obvious pretty much cinches how ham-fisted the writing and direction of this movie -- thanks Eli -- were. 

[GH2001]

 a lesbian romp. If you're into that. 

Well who ain't.

[Kaos]

House on Willow Street

Kidnappers snatch the wrong person.  Spoiler!  She's a demon. 

That gives the writers of this crap license to toss in an exorcism inside a found footage movie inside a kidnapping/hostage movie. 

It was like turducken.  Minus the ducken.

[jmar]

House on Willow Street

Kidnappers snatch the wrong person.  Spoiler!  She's a demon. 

That gives the writers of this crap license to toss in an exorcism inside a found footage movie inside a kidnapping/hostage movie. 

It was like turducken.  Minus the ducken.

No lesbians huh?

[wesfau2]

The Dark Tower

Despite awful reviews, I've been waiting too long for this movie to not see it.

Did not hate it.  I understand why the book-nerds are up in arms: given the temporal limitations, the movie gave short-shrift to too many important people/places/events.  It could not (and certainly was not intended to) be a visual representation of the entire epic story.

That said, there is a lot to like about this movie.  Elba did a pretty great job at capturing the flawed/conflicted Roland.  MM wasn't the perfect villain (and lacked Walter's manic gaiety) but he was a menacing presence hidden by a smile and restrained himself enough to avoid the echoes of Wooderson he brings to many of his roles.

The gunslinging is standard rampage movie fare with a touch of Deadshot.  I was worried they'd get a little too superhero/cartoonish with the fight scenes, but just as it was about to go too far the director reined the acrobatics back in.  The "winning" gunshot is a little dab of brilliance with Roland exploiting Walter's arrogance. 

If you went into this one hoping or expecting to see sweeping panoramas and to experience the long days and nights on foot that were the hallmarks of the series, then you've set yourself up for disappointment.  The nature of the walking quest spanning 7 books is that it imbues the story with a pace to match the physical progress of the characters.  This movie is rushed from the beginning as the director tried to get the broad, sweeping narrative to fit into 95 minutes.  For that matter, I don't know why they didn't Pete Jackson it and double the run time to give the story more room to breathe.

The look/style of the movie was also a bit of a betrayal of the source material.  While not a "western" by any stretch, the books feature a man that, in my  mind's eye, is more cowboy than time/multiverse traveling merc.  The book's scenes, unless a particular backdrop is required (eg - Lud), trend to a "western" aesthetic with a dystopian varnish when I envision them.  The movie is more sci-fi styled than I would have chosen and there is a heavy focus on the events in NYC.  These are jarring when compared to the relatively pastoral pictures in my head.

I think, though, it is a fine effort and lays the foundation for additional movies (I don't think Walter died from a few bullet wounds, no matter how tricky the shot that did him in) and the rumored television series that will serve to fill in backstory and develop characters beyond the limitations of the 90 minute features.

[Snaggletiger]

The Hit Man's Bodyguard

Did you like Deadpool? If yes, then you'll love this one.  Ryan Reynolds plays a professional bodyguard and winds up having to single-handedly get Samuel L. Jackson, a professional assassin, to court in Amsterdam to testify against a former communist dictator who slaughtered villages.  No spoiler alert because that's revealed from the get-go.  Besides, the plot adds nothing to the flick.  It's simply about the smart ass back and forth between Reynolds and SLJ. 

They could have cut it by 20-30 minutes and left out a couple of mind numbingly unbelievable car chase, shoot-em-up scenes.  But it's worth putting up with them for the scenes between the two.  I checked to see if there was any relation between the writers of Deadpool and this one because it's just DP with a different plot.  And I laughed my ass off in DP. Oh, don't take the kiddies.  They take the phrase "Mother fucker" to Al Borges/Rick Trickett-esque levels.  All in all, a very entertaining watch.   

[Godfather]

The Hit Man's Bodyguard Deadpool Saves Nick Fury

Did you like Deadpool? If yes, then you'll love this one.  Ryan Reynolds plays a professional bodyguard and winds up having to single-handedly get Samuel L. Jackson, a professional assassin, to court in Amsterdam to testify against a former communist dictator who slaughtered villages.  No spoiler alert because that's revealed from the get-go.  Besides, the plot adds nothing to the flick.  It's simply about the smart ass back and forth between Reynolds and SLJ. 

They could have cut it by 20-30 minutes and left out a couple of mind numbingly unbelievable car chase, shoot-em-up scenes.  But it's worth putting up with them for the scenes between the two.  I checked to see if there was any relation between the writers of Deadpool and this one because it's just DP with a different plot.  And I laughed my ass off in DP. Oh, don't take the kiddies.  They take the phrase "Mother fucker" to Al Borges/Rick Trickett-esque levels.  All in all, a very entertaining watch.

FTFY

[AUJarhead]

The Hit Man's Bodyguard Deadpool Saves Nick Fury Green Lantern saves Mr Glass

[CCTAU]

I don't think that picture is her.

and Wonder Woman was horrible.

Sadly, the X has its final gay hijack!!!!

[Kaos]

Ok.  So I'm trying to be honest and objective here.  Somebody's criticism of Wonder Woman had me wondering (ha, a pun) if it was really as good as I initially thought it was.  Then today James Cameron -- who can pretty much kiss my ass because Avatar was blue fucking cluster and I hate the blazing fuck out of Titanic -- unloaded on the movie as a setback for women or something.

So I tried to remember the movie.  I tried to remember the plot. Tried to remember what was good about it.  I tried to literally remember a single thing that happened.  I couldn't recall much.

This is what I keep coming up with...

She was in that uniform, walking into the line of fire. In that uniform.  Yummmm. I mean, ummm..

Then a lot of stuff blew up and there was some guy or something crashing around and destroying pavement.  I think.  Was it a guy or another girl? 

I just don't know. 

The only thing I do know is that Gal Gadot was utterly captivating.  She filled the screen and I didn't want to take my eyes off her.  I forgot to breathe while she was up there.  I've seen her in other movies and she didn't have that effect.  In this, though, she hypnotized me. 

Was it a good movie? Be damned if I know.  I remember it as one and I'm going to keep pretending it was. 

[Kaos]

Fist Fight

Paper-thin premise. 

What a waste of talent.  Charlie Day, Ice Cube, Dinesh from Silicon Valley, Tracy Morgan, Ugly unfunny bitch from 22 Jump Street, Hank from Breaking Bad, red-head big titty girl from Mad Men.  All squandered in a stupid movie that had zero laughs. 

So much wrong with it.  The timeframe was ridiculous for one.  High school teachers using that much profanity in class was another.  Teachers continuously wandering up and down the hallways and never being in class.

The only potential comedy this awful movie had came in the form of complete awkwardness.  Teacher commenting on student's fuckability? Not funny, just awkward.  Elementary school girl profanely rapping in a talent show?  Not funny, just cringe-worthy. 

When it got to the actual fight -- after a series of events that should have taken several days, not just one four-hour span -- the film actually had a little something to say.  All the other classless, humorless shit that preceded it rendered it moot, however. 

I am dumber for having wasted my time on this.  All involved are dumber for being a part of it.  There should be a movie board that suspends actors for sub-par performances.  Everybody in this movie should get a one-year ban. 

[Kaos]

IT

Stephen King is one of my favorite writers.  He has a way with words that paint a vivid mental picture.  For me, that's always been one of the most daunting parts of creating a film from one of his works.  Nothing on film can capture the same tension and imagery that you've imagined yourself during reading it.  Most of the films that tried to stay true to his work fail because they can't hold up to that burden.  My imagination is always infinitely better than anything a director can produce. 

That maxim holds true particularly for horror.  King's non-horror works (Green Mile, Shawshank, Stand by Me) bear the movie treatment far better than films based his horror  (Carrie, Pet Sematery, The Stand) because horror is truly subjective.  What scares me isn't going to scare you necessarily. 

IT is one of the more difficult films to do properly.  As much as I appreciate Tim Curry the TV mini-series version from 1990 starring Venus Flytrap, John Boy Walton, Jack Tripper, Judge Harry Stone, Elaine from 48 Hours, a random gay guy and the little sister from Ginger Snaps was crappy.  That movie got, to me, a great deal of undeserved praise.  It was poorly acted, the CGI was ridiculously hokey and the way the director interspersed present and past was awful.  I never liked that version. 

For that reason I was a little hesitant to give the current incarnation a shot.  But I'm glad I did. 

IT has never really been a horror movie.  It's more a story of a pack of lost and lonely kids finding their way in a world that's stacked against them.  The clown isn't the true horror.  The terror that really grips these kids comes from being picked on by bullies, being abused by parents, being ignored and devalued, being forced to live by an artificial code they don't understand or appreciate.  The horror is life.  The horror is being afraid to stand up for yourself when you're being taken advantage of.  The horror is being weak and alone. 

I've often argued that the clown doesn't even really exist, it's just their collective device to deal with the real horrors of their personal lives.  The demon they fight lives inside them only. 

This movie did a fantastic job of capturing that dynamic.  Oh, sure, the clown was probably terrifying in its own right.  But the film reached into the souls of the Losers Club in a way the 1990 version never came close to capturing.  It made you feel their pain and frustration.  The confrontation with Pennywise was part of the story, yes, but the true story was in the relationship between the loser kids.  It was about them learning to face their fears and stand them down.  Not the clown.  I contend that was really just a metaphor, they stood down all the other things that tormented them.  They found their strength in their collective weaknesses.

The movie was never scary to me (few truly are any more) but it was still fantastic.  I was really impressed with the carefully layered performances of the unknowns who starred in the movie, particularly the girl who played Beverly Marsh. 

It was an honest, attentive recreation of a Stephen King story, something I've honestly never seen done this well for any of his "horror" works.  Really impressed. 

If I had to complain at all, I thought the movie could have tacked on a little more gore and a touch more of the clown.  If it lacked anything it lacked enough vicious bite.  But that's a ticky complaint. 

I thought the movie was great.  It honored King's work and I have a great appreciation for that. 

[Kaos]

It Comes At Night

No.  It doesn't.  Nothing does. 

I'm not smart enough to like this movie apparently. 

Boo. BOO.

[Godfather]

It Comes At Night

No.  It doesn't.  Nothing does. 

I'm not smart enough to like this movie apparently. 

Boo. BOO.

I come at night....and sometimes in the morning.

[AUJarhead]

I come at night....and sometimes in the morning.

Real fuckin' smart answer! Why don't you fuckin' aim, huh?

[GH2001]

I come at night....and sometimes in the morning.

The first hour of work just got real relaxed

[wesfau2]

The new Kingsman is a predictably good time.

Same basic setup as the first film (devious supervillain threatens the mass of humanity), lots of great action and some exciting new American faces.

A really fun cameo in the jungle and the return of a former character (not Harry) help make this the most fun you'll have between Guardians 2 and Star Wars.

[Kaos]

Saw I - IV

As much as I watch horror movies, you'd think I'd be a student of Saw.  Before last week, though, I'd never seen a single one of the films.  I avoided them fearing they'd be little more than gratuitous commercialized torture porn.  With the new Jigsaw movie coming this October I finally decided to delve into the Saw franchise and watch them all in order.   

Finished four installments so far.  Each of the four movies has its own merits, but the series overall is uneven.  I like the way the movies tie all the threads together in the end but I'm sometimes thrown by the constant jumping around in time. 

One thing that also nags at me is the complexity of the traps that Kramer sets.  There's no way all of that could be done, no way some of the events could be predicted. Take the final sequence in III.  How could you possibly predict that one person would be shot, but not fatally?

Watching them over successive days -- or with only a few days in between -- helps make sense of the whole puzzle.  If I'd had to wait a year between III and IV, for instance?  I don't think I would have remembered how all of that played out. 

I and IV were my least favorite.  I disliked the first one primarily because Cary Elwes is such a terrible actor.  I thought the story and the set up were  really good but his overacting came close to ruining it for me. 

IV was just too convoluted.  The traps and tricks reached the point of absurd and the denouement at the end was a little silly.  It strayed into absurdity and didn't do an adequate job of explaining why that made any sense.  I did like seeing Betsy Russell.  Her face hasn't held up well, but she's kept that nice body that was made famous in Private School where she displayed a near perfect set on horseback (http://videocelebs.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/image1_temp-844.jpg -- don't click at work!) 

II was the best so far.  It made the most sense to me and wrapped the game up very neatly at the end.  I like a movie that has the capacity to surprise and Saw II did exactly that.  The rules are simple, but you've got to pay attention to each word. I didn't. And I didn't see that coming.  I literally had none of that figured out.  The traps were much simpler and actually fairly plausible unlike the absurdly improbable setups in IV.

III lost me until the last 15 minutes where it brought everything together in a manner I didn't entirely expect.  The only thing that kept it down were the "there's no way that could possibly have been anticipated" moments. 

Looking forward to the next three -- or is it four? -- and curious how they'll keep the Kramer character alive.  I saw his brain come out of his head so there's that.  I just hope the next few hew closer to telling a better story and spend less time on impossible, improbable, ridiculously outlandish traps. 

[GH2001]

Saw I - IV

As much as I watch horror movies, you'd think I'd be a student of Saw.  Before last week, though, I'd never seen a single one of the films.  I avoided them fearing they'd be little more than gratuitous commercialized torture porn.  With the new Jigsaw movie coming this October I finally decided to delve into the Saw franchise and watch them all in order.   

Finished four installments so far.  Each of the four movies has its own merits, but the series overall is uneven.  I like the way the movies tie all the threads together in the end but I'm sometimes thrown by the constant jumping around in time. 

One thing that also nags at me is the complexity of the traps that Kramer sets.  There's no way all of that could be done, no way some of the events could be predicted. Take the final sequence in III.  How could you possibly predict that one person would be shot, but not fatally?

Watching them over successive days -- or with only a few days in between -- helps make sense of the whole puzzle.  If I'd had to wait a year between III and IV, for instance?  I don't think I would have remembered how all of that played out. 

I and IV were my least favorite.  I disliked the first one primarily because Cary Elwes is such a terrible actor.  I thought the story and the set up were  really good but his overacting came close to ruining it for me. 

IV was just too convoluted.  The traps and tricks reached the point of absurd and the denouement at the end was a little silly.  It strayed into absurdity and didn't do an adequate job of explaining why that made any sense.  I did like seeing Betsy Russell.  Her face hasn't held up well, but she's kept that nice body that was made famous in Private School where she displayed a near perfect set on horseback (http://videocelebs.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/image1_temp-844.jpg -- don't click at work!) 

II was the best so far.  It made the most sense to me and wrapped the game up very neatly at the end.  I like a movie that has the capacity to surprise and Saw II did exactly that.  The rules are simple, but you've got to pay attention to each word. I didn't. And I didn't see that coming.  I literally had none of that figured out.  The traps were much simpler and actually fairly plausible unlike the absurdly improbable setups in IV.

III lost me until the last 15 minutes where it brought everything together in a manner I didn't entirely expect.  The only thing that kept it down were the "there's no way that could possibly have been anticipated" moments. 

Looking forward to the next three -- or is it four? -- and curious how they'll keep the Kramer character alive.  I saw his brain come out of his head so there's that.  I just hope the next few hew closer to telling a better story and spend less time on impossible, improbable, ridiculously outlandish traps.

the next couple have a lot to do with pre recorded tapes, his understudies and things he's already set in motion.