Change Your Image
pandion1
Reviews
Haunt (2019)
Surprisingly watchable
I went into this film with no particular expectations and was pleasantly surprised. It is, admittedly, the traditional plot of "teens go somewhere and get killed". What elevates it is the acting, the writing and the characters. They avoid the usual array of unlikable characters so that I actually cared about them. While they still have the occasional attack of "horror film stupidity", mostly they act logically and sensibly throughout.
The first thirty minutes is nothing but introducing the characters and building up the tension. And it does it incredibly well. When the violence starts, it hits the line between graphic and implied and is very effective because of it.
At the end, much is unexplained - which is good. Leave it as it is, and don't try and justify it. This is a good Halloween romp and in future I'm always going as a baseball player.
Girls Trip (2017)
Bad trip
I'm clearly not the target audience for this film.
The story is about four black women who go to the Essence Festival to try and relive their college days. The characters are cliched - especially the Tiffany Haddish.character who is the sort of person that I would pay money to spend time away from. The performances are good, but this film goes out of its way to be offensive. The scene where two of them urinate on a crowd is a particular low.
Can someone tell me why it is acceptable for Queen Latifah to make comments about "stupid white boy s**t" and not get criticised for it? If a white man dared to make a comment about "stupid black woman s**t", they would never work again. I'm all for equality - but it works both ways.
The thing about this that really annoys me is that the four women are all good actresses, wasting their time on juvenile tripe.
Evil Dead (2013)
Maybe the evil should have stayed dead?
I honestly don't know why I don't like this film more. It's gory, spooky and well acted. Camerawork is good, effects are good. But it lacks something. The problem with a remake is that it needs to honour the original without just repeating it. This doesn't really do that.
We get everything that was in the original evil dead - the tree "rape", the chained up hatch, the removal of the hand - but there's nothing about this that makes me want to watch this film again. Bizarrely I have actually watched it twice - because it is so unforgettable that I forgot I'd already seen it.
It lacks someone to hang the film on - instead of Bruce Campbell, we get a rather earnest figure. There is no humour and the film takes its' ridiculous plot far too seriously. Gender swapping the Final Guy into a Final Girl seems pointless - especially as she hasn't actually done anything all film. It's a shame they've resorted to the Final Girl cliche. But the characters consistently act like morons and make stupid decisions - which annoys me - and, by the way, how the hell does someone PULL their own hand off ??
If I had to sit down and watch it again, I could. But I'd rather watch a film that is offering us something new -- or even just watch one of the original films.
The Meg (2018)
A guilty pleasure
On the surface, there is little of merit to this film. But something about it makes me watch it again and again. It is a simplistic, special effects action film - but it works. Jason Statham plays the dishevelled expert called in despite a previous disaster. And he plays himself (as usual). We have some stock characters in support - an estranged love interest, a cute child, an evil billionaire - but the roles are all played very well.
The opening scenes do a great job of hiding the Meg, and the scene where we finally properly see it is truly awesome - the sight of the little girl stood watching it as it approaches gives me goosebumps every time. The Meg always looks superb and while this film will never scar me as much as Jaws did, I just love watching it.
The film is a rollercoaster that slams along at pace, while having time for some decent dialogue. And who can resist a film where Jason Statham does a Dory impression?
Cradle of Fear (2001)
Cradle of drivel
It's hard to tie down what the worst thing is about this film. The acting is appalling - I sincerely hope that none 9f them are relying on their skills to feed themselves. The script is dreadful - which leads me to wonder if the scriptwriters have ever actually held a conversation in their entire lives. The plot is allegedly original - only if yours never watched a film or read a book. The soundtrack is terrible. The special effects are laughable - the spider baby being a particular low point.
Are there any redeeming features? No.
From the first scene it is clear that the writer has some kind of goth revenge fantasy going along the lines of "wouldn't it be cool if ...". Apparently this is a "homage to Amicus". Rubbish. I would advise you not to waste your time.
The Croods (2013)
Things that rhyme with Grug
If you're looking for a cartoon with a message, with sophisticated humour and layers of meaning or for something that you could pretend is "for adults", move on at once. The Croods is an entertaining film with an amusing premise. The animation is very good, there are some great jokes and the film never drags. The voice acting is good and this is one of the few Ryan Reynolds films that I've actually enjoyed.
This is a definite feel good film. You know that the peril will never do anything really bad but the characters are engaging enough that you still worry about them. I laughed out loud several times - which is the best recommendation I can make for a comedy.
Match Point (2005)
Good acting, poor film
This apparently is touted as Woody Allen's triumphant return to the cinema. Must be a whole new definition of triumphant. While the acting is good, the characters are not well written. Allen makes a serious error basing this in England - which he clearly knows very little about. I've read that this is about the "middle class". Apparently the middle class lives in estates, has access to apparently unlimited money and gives random people jobs. The one thing that this class in question would NEVER do is invite the tennis professional along to a social event!
The film spend a good 75% of its time on character development. Long, drawn out, boring character development. Scarlett Johanssons character is someone with no likeable qualities apart from her sexual allure. Jonathan Rhys Meyers is allegedly Irish - but the only reason you know that is that other people refer to him as Irish throughout the film. His change to murderer is unbelievable. Not only does he decide to murder his inconveniently pregnant mistress, but he also murders the woman next door just to throw the police off his scent. There is absolutely nothing in his character to suggest he is capable of this apart from the fact that he is "competitive".
The film is utterly without humour or anything to leaven it. It comes across as Allen trying to do a serious film - which it is. It's just not an interesting one. It's billed as a psychological thriller. But it's as thrilling as checking to see if the Stilton has turned,
The Woman (2011)
Man good, woman bad
I suspect the makers of this film are undeservedly proud of it. As men, they have produced (they feel) a truly feminist statement where they subtly show that the civilised man is actually worse than the uncivilised woman. Nothing could be further from the truth.
The characters are facile and cliched. The husband might as well be twirling his moustache as he announces his evil plan. It's not enough that he dominates his family, kidnaps a woman and rapes her. No, he also has to keep a secret daughter as a dog AND rape his other daughter. The wife is such a cliche of a subdued wife that she seems to be from the 1950s. Either that or she was brought up in Stepford. Don't forget to add in the cliche of the withdrawn teenage daughter mysteriously choosing to wear baggy clothes and the concerned teacher.
But it doesn't stop there. Every single male in the film is presented as being abusive. Brian is clearly follow8ng in his fathers footsteps as we see when he watches some other boys bullying a girl and then deliberately puts gum in the hair of another girl who likes him. Even the boy in the swimming pool is clearly of the same mould as he swims off after trying to speak to Peg, calling her a "strumpet" as she won't talk to him. (As an aside - strumpet? Now there's a word that modern teenagers use ALL the time).
The plot itself is risible. What luck that Chris happens to have his cellar set up for keeping someone captive. The introduction of the feral daughter is so out of left field that it feels as though they just needed another reason for us to hate the father. His reactions to the concerns of the teacher are so over the top, that you wonder how he has been able to function in society. The writers might claim that this is because he is spiralling out of control - but nothing about the film suggests that.
The music is out of place and seems to have been solely because the words are always appropriate to what is going on. Effects are good. The film builds no tension and stumbles incoherently towards its ending.
And, if you were in any doubt as to the subtle message : man bad, woman good. Just remember that.
w Delta z (2007)
Deeply flawed thriller
This is a detective thriller along the lines of Seven with some elements of Saw thrown in. But it isn't anywhere near as good as either. The acting is generally good - although Tom Hardy mumbles his lines to the point where subtitles are needed. The issue here is the plot, the characterisation and the piling of cliche on top of cliche.
Why write a detective thriller if you don't know how the police work? Why write people in such a cliched way that they are two dimensional? Why waste some good actors on a plot that is so predictable that you know what will happen at the end within about 30 minutes?
There is a good film here fighting to get out. But whoever wrote it has clearly learnt everything they know from 1970s cop shows. The female detective is patronised, abused and sexually harassed at work - and puts up with it in a way that would never be accepted in the 2000s.. The police consistently act stupidly and do ridiculous things just to move the plot forward. Worst of all is the completely 2D nature of all the characters. They are badly drawn and leave the actors with very little to work with. It's worth noting, by the way, that all of the police are corrupt - even the female detective who very quickly ignores everything that is going on and jumps on the bandwagon.
The writer also grabs every cliche they can - especially in the portrayal of the gang members. This smacks of a film shoved together to try and cash in on the success of other, better films.
Vampire's Kiss (1988)
Ignore and watch Renfield instead
Hiding somewhere in this film, is a good idea. But saddled with a bad script and Nicholas Cage overacting as only he can, it sadly fails to make the best of its material.
The concept is a good one - a successful businessman becomes convinced that he is turning into a vampire. High jinks ensue - or, at least, that was probably the plan. Instead, we are given a central character who is so unlikeable that I would have been happy if he was run over by a truck early on in the film. There is no sympathy for his deteriorating mental state, because we just don't ca4e enough about him.
And, of course, it lacks the one thing that you need for a black comedy - things that are funny. My advice is to avoid this turkey and watch Renfield instead.
The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 (1986)
Black comedy without the comedy
I'll start off by saying that I have never revered Texas Chainsaw Massacre as much as other people. I've always felt that it gets undue praise, though I admit that it did change the way horror films were made. Compared to this sequel, it deserves every plaudit it gets because this shows how bad a slasher film can be.
Like a lot of bad horror films, it is marketed as a "black comedy" but it's missing an essential element: the comedy. I think this gets used when a film has been made that is bloody awful and they're trying to make an excuse. Call it a black comedy and maybe we'll get away with it.
The premise is not bad. The acting is ok - which it should be when you have Dennis Hopper in it. The problem here is that Dennis Hopper has made far more bad films than he has good ones. Here, he spends the second half of the film just incoherently yelling. Similarly, the female lead spends the second half of the film doing little but screaming which just gets annoying.
This is a shameless attempt to cash in on the first film. Much like a lot of sequels, it damages the reputation of the original by its very existence. Dreadful.
The Stylist (2020)
A little off the top please.
The Stylist has everything needed to make it a great film: beautiful cinematography, great acting, good direction and a good concept. It explores ideas around obsession, loneliness and alienation and links them to the way that people can become convinced that they have a relationship with someone else that does not really exist. The relationship between someone and their stylist/barber is curiously intimate, but in the end do you really know the person that is using scissors dangerously close to your carotid?
Given all that and sweeping melodic theme music, this should be a recipe for a superb horror film. But something about it doesn't quite work, I've seen it described as a slow burn - but it doesn't build any tension. The gore is dealt with in a matter of fact way, but the scenes with it lack impact. It feels to me as though the film-makers didn't quite know what they wanted to make. It dips its toe in horror without fully taking the plunge. It's unsettling, but never actually scary. It's a shame. I think this could have been a truly amazing film, but it doesn't quite land. Stylistically, it is very good - but in the end comes down to style over substance..
Stan Helsing (2009)
Imagine Scary Movie, but worse
This movie tells us from the start that it is a parody. It is, in so far as it fits a 12 year old child's definition of parody. There is no cleverness here. No wit, no subtlety. No chance to make a crass joke is avoided. There is none of the intellectual sophistication necessary for a parody. This is what happens when a script gets written by a child and then somehow an adult decides to make a film. What makes it worse is that even when the jokes could be good, they completely fail to land due to the inept handling of the film by the actors, the director and the script writer.
I thought it was impossible for a film to be worse than Scary Movie. I was wrong.
Rupture (2016)
Ten minutes stretched to two hours
Films that come under the heading of science fiction tend to come with three types of science: actual science, super or futuristic science and piffle. Rupture lands solidly in the last bracket. It has that feeling of someone who once read a textbook, didn't understand it and thought "hey let's use that in a film". The simplest example of that is a standard taser that affects people for 15 minutes - piffle.
The film is also described as a "slow burn". The problem is that films like that have to catch fire at some point. This one doesn't - instead the slow burn is extinguished by the equivalent of someone dumping a bucket of urine on it.
The acting is OK, but the main problem is the plot. There isn't one. What little plot there is stops when you are just finding out what's going on and leaves us with an ending that screams "please be interested enough to let us make a sequel". A sequel would be good for only one thing: to answer the age old question "what is more boring than watching paint dry?"
There might be a good film here screaming to get out. But it needs trimming down (to about 15 minutes) and it desperately needs a third act.
The Road (2009)
We're all going to die
There are two basic approaches to a post-apocalyptic narrative: the hopeful one that shows humanities good side winning through against the odds (or, at least, giving hope that this will happen) and the nihilistic approach that concentrates on humanities bad side to the point that you really want everyone to die. The Road falls firmly in the latter category.
The photography captures this beautifully with its muted colours and incessant use of grey. For that is what the world is grey, grey and more grey and, oh by the way, everyone is going to die.
It might be well acted (which it is), it might be beautifully shot (which it is) and it might be a faithful adaptation of an apparently much loved novel (which it allegedly is) but it's miserable. It makes me want to remove the novel from my TBR pile as I don't think I need another dose of depression.
It has one message : we're all going to die.
A one word description of this film: bleak.
Not the sort of film to recommend to anyone in need of cheering up.
The Paper Tigers (2020)
There is only one tiger on the mountain
The story of three over the hill martial artists who have to try and remember their skills after their Sifu is killed.
There is nothing particularly original here, but it's a well told, well acted story. Some of it is very funny.
I think I appreciate it more due to my age - I get what they're feeling. The "chase" scene in the alley really resonated. The old rival made me laugh every time he turned up.
This is an amusing and entertaining film with some surprisingly good martial arts. The characters are relatable, the plot is straightforward and it's well filmed. It's never going to win any Oscars, but it's good, solid entertainment.
Moon of the Wolf (1972)
Nice little pot boiler
This is a made for TV movie, so I want expecting a great deal out of it. Essentially, it is a murder mystery after a young woman is found killed - apparently by wild dogs. Then the doctor determines she was murdered and the local sheriff starts an investigation. Soon, we find out that she was pregnant and the man responsible is her mysterious lover. Add in the local wealthy landowner, with his mysterious inherited malarial disease and there are plenty of suspects.
There is nothing overtly supernatural for the first half of the movie, apart from the suggestive title and the mad old man who mutters about the "loug garou ". The creature only appears in the final act of the film, which is just as well - this is a "stick hair on someone hands and face" lycanthrope.
The acting is pretty good and the film moves forward at a good speed. There is some genuine tension in the final scenes, and it worked for me because the characters were well drawn and did sensible things - it was great that the sheriff didn't suddenly decide to believe in werewolves.
If you want blood, guts, gore and scares, I suggest you look elsewhere. But it's a good rendition of a werewolf story and well put across.
Mighty Aphrodite (1995)
The other kind of comedy
There are two kinds of comedy: the kind which makes you laugh, and the kind which makes you nod, grin wryly and think "oh, that's clever". Mighty Aphrodite sits solidly in the second category. Now, some will praise this film to the skies as it is a Woody Allen film (all praise the mighty Allen). I, however, thought it was dull.
The praise for the film seems to focus on the acting and the choreography - you'll note that the comedy, the plot and Woody Allen (all praise the mighty Allen) are not included in that list. Because Allen (all praise the mighty Allen) puts in the same performance that he does in every film: that annoying, irritating, slightly hunched over loser, shambling from badly delivered line to badly delivered line.
The saving grace of the film is the Greek chorus which is cleverly used and the closest thing to being actually funny. It says a lot that the Greek chorus comes over as more realistic than the concept that Helena Bonham-Carter would be in love with Woody Allen (all praise the mighty Allen).
The Last Horror Movie (2003)
Who's that at the door?
I love a good found footage film - the problem is, that there are a lot of bad ones. The Last Horror Movie has divided opinion to such an extent that it was difficult to see which camp it would fall into - personally, I think this is one of the better ones.
This starts as a low quality slasher movie, which is then interrupted by Max (the killer) who explains that he has over-written the actual film. What we then have is a film which documents his kills - sometimes quite graphically. What makes this different is that it shows other aspects of his life too - his relationship with his sister & nephew and his day job as a wedding photographer.
Max narrates his film and challenges the audience. He doesn't make any excuse for his actions - he refers to himself as a psychopath several times - instead he repeatedly asks us why we're still watching the film. The scene with a double murder is the most explicit element of this theme, with the camera staying away from both murders, letting us imagining what has happened. Max then asks if we wanted to have been watching instead.
Towards the end of the film, the reason for Max repeatedly challenging the audience becomes clear - he is killing people who have watched the film. This adds a frisson to the film - or, at least, it would if we still got films from video rental stores! That elements dates the film and somewhat ruins the illusion.
Despite that, this is a good film. It asks some difficult questions about the viewers of slasher / torture films - and does not give any answers. There are a lot of implications made, but no comfortable answers given - what the Venezuelan Veal actually is, for instance.
It's not perfect but it's a damned good watch. The film hangs on Max and he is extremely convincing- and, in his own way, quite scary.
Krampus (2015)
Exceeded expectations
I went into this film not expecting very much. Initially, it certainly met my very low expectations. The set up is exactly the same as that found in numerous saccharine sweet Christmas films : a harried family who play host to a vile group of relatives, including an arrogant father, an uninvited aunt and three repulsive kids. Their horrific behaviour pushes the host families son over the edge into a tantrum and he gets the standard lecture about being nice to people over Christmas (why is it we never have to get the other people to be nice?). So far, so standard and I watched on in fear that the film would end up putting me at risk of a diabetic coma.
Then the film takes a side turning and really takes off. From that point, it speeds up and the characters are quickly running from one danger to another. This is not a scary film - it's pretty much on the level of Gremlins - but it delivers some good tension and surprises. The special effects are very good and when you finally see the Krampus, it does not disappoint.
There are some great scenes:
- the fight in the attic
- Howard vs the gingerbread men
I initially didn't like the ending as it seemed like a copout - although it had been foreshadowed by the children sat watching A Christmas Carol earlier in the film. It does leave the Krampus as more like someone who teaches lessons rather than the dark root of the legend. And then it occurred to me - at the end, maybe they really are in hell.
A great film. I will be recommending it to friends.
The Holy Trinity (2023)
I want my Amazon Prime money back
I love horror films. Supernatural, scares, slashers, psychological - it's all good. As long as the film has something going for it, some iota of an attempt to deliver a good product. The Holy Trinity manages to epically fail on almost every criteria.
Sound - terrible. Either inaudible mumbles or ear-splitting shrieks.
Photography - poor. I could do better with an iPhone.
Acting - all of the people in this film manage to fail to put over their lines convincingly - and they don't even ham it up enough for it to be funny. I've seen better acting when a dog tries to convince someone that they haven't been fed this week. The minimum criterion for a horror actor is the ability to scream - they even fail at that. I've done better when I stubbed my toe.
Dialogue - it was either improvised or written by someone who honed their craft in writing abusive comments on toilet walls. And theirs would have been the ones you didn't laugh at.
Plot - risible. Which is good, as I don't often get the opportunity to use that word.
Special effects - laughably bad. I particularly enjoyed the fluffy spider. I grudgingly admit to the apocalypse fireballing of New York being quite effective. But it's so different from the other rubbish that I wonder where they stole it from.
Given all the above this could well become a cult film. It puts John Waters in context, as this film shows just how badly a film can be made.
La montaña sagrada (1973)
Unmitigated piffle
There has been a lot written about this and I freely admit that I am not up to date on my Tarot, my religious symbology and my iconography. What I do have though, is a fairly accurate ability to detect pretension. And my detector is currently off the chart.
I think there is a way to enjoy this film - but it would involve illicit drugs or more alcohol than my stomach could safely ingest. I see that at least one reviewer found the film hysterically funny - I suspect that my posited approach would have the same result.
Beautifully photographed and (in someone's mind) deep and meaningful, for me this is one of those films where surrealism jumps over the cliff into self-indulgent pretension. This film doesn't just jump once though, it climbs back up the cliff and jumps again and again and again.
I'm reluctant to define a film as drivel ... but I find myself unable to find another word that successfully summarises my feelings about this movie. I hope the director and cast enjoyed making it, because I certainly didn't enjoy watching it. I would only recommend this film to my worst enemy. Not even the second worst. Just the worst.
Glen or Glenda (1953)
Not as bad as I was led to believe
When this film came out, I can see why it was so panned. Wood takes not one but two taboo topics and presents us with what is effectively an information film about them. Both of these topics still cause controversy 70 years later, so I can only imagine what people thought then.
The film starts with the suicide of a transvestite. The investigating officer goes to a psychiatrist who tells him two stories: Glen/Glenda and Alan/Anne. The stories of both people are told simply and in a straightforward manner - which did remind me of government information films. The really bizarre elements of the field are the segments invoking Bela Lugosi and the dream sequence. Both seem to have been put in to ... hell, I have no idea why they were put in. They're just weird.
In the film, Wood explores a lot of misconceptions. He splits transvestism from homosexuality and makes it clear that not all transvestites want, or need, sex changed. The one thing that really jars for me is the ending, when Glen is cured of his transvestism.
This is a flawed film, but actually still has enough useful information in it that some bigoted people from the 21st century could do with watching it.
Galaxina (1980)
Simply dire
There are some films that are parodies, there are some films that are homages and there are some films that are copies. Below all of those are films that are slapped together in a desperate attempt to cash in on the success of other, better films. And just below those is where Galaxina sits.
This film has no redeeming features. The acting would be described as wooden if that weren't an insult to trees. The dialogue is so badly written that it makes Gemma Collins seem cultured. The special effects would be better if a 6 yr old had drawn it on a cereal box.
This is one of a set of films that advertise themselves as comedies or parodies. I suspect with them that, in fact, they have been made in all seriousness but the end result was so appalling, that they then make the claim to be a parody/comedy in order to try and appear less bad at their jobs. I fervently hope that everyone responsible for this dross went on to find fulfilling careers in a field more suited to their talents - possibly something in the effluent management field.
Feeding the Masses (2004)
Low budget zombie movie
The world has been infected with a virus being called Lazarus. The main characters work for a TV channel and they are becoming frustrated at censorship of their news reports. Three decide to head out and try to send the real news out on line.
When I started watching this, I checked when it was made as some of it looked as though this was a satire on the media during Covid - but actually this was made 14 years beforehand. And that would give it a level of subtlety that it just doesn't have.
There are special effects - but they are poor. There is acting - also poor and, unfortunately, two of the leads are particularly bad. In the end, it's a cheap attempt at a zombie film. The adverts particularly amused me : Birman and Birman who specialise in Reclamation and Reburial of those loved ones who have become infected. The advisory ad "just play dead" is an excellent parody of government information films put out about nuclear war. But they are the high points in what is generally a weak film.
Some people have complained that this ignores the subtlety of Romero - personally, I think they're overstating it as Romero's wasn't exactly that subtle in the first place.
This is not a radical reinterpretation of the zombie film, but I enjoyed it more than Zack Snyders overblown attempt.