cwfrauman-716-721058 Reviews

The Other Side of the Door (2016)

Lousy

[4/10 · 23 May 2016]

This is the sort of movie that can be picked apart in more ways than this reviewer can muster the will to write about. About the only thing it has going for it are the special effects and they aren't really used to much effect. In this sense the trailer was completely misleading. Going in I was at least half-expecting it might be better than the rating on IMDb at the time, in large part because the special effects looked so cool. But they weren't, and this movie isn't, nor ever was, going to be any good. It's really too bad. The actors are well cast and the production value is top notch.

Some of the dialogue falls flat, though. I would blame the acting but it's really the script that's the problem. It can seem at times like no thought was put into its construction. The same can also be said regarding the plot holes, which this movie is riddled with, and one wishes there could be a few scares seeing as this is supposed to be a horror film after all. Sadly, it was not to be.

Nothing this botched production does can make up for so many obvious flaws. The premise isn't even close to being original, too. It's like Pandora's box, and just like the mythos, it's slightly misogynistic. The three stars are for the performance, whereas one extra star was added because I like the setting which takes place in India.

Seriously, though, don't bother watching this movie. You'll save yourself a big headache.

Gravy (2015)

A pleasant surprise

[7/10 · 27 January 2016]

This is one of those movies you go into thinking you're probably not going to like it for any number of reasons - low production costs, comically misleading trailer, a cast of largely unknown actors - but when you come out the other side it turns out to be a pleasant surprise.

The star actor takes a little getting used to which has more to do with the makeup artist than anything else. She's dressed like a pro football player, for one thing. Padded shoulders, thick black ink smeared across her face. But the writing is way above average which helps carry this delightful miscarriage through to its conclusion.

Two of the actors are actually well-known for their comedic sensibilities. They both are on the side of the lunatics holding up a small-town close-knit family of diner workers (they're not really family but they act like it), one of whom stars in a little show called It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, where he assumes the role of a milk- sipping, possibly incestuous, brother of a couple of weirdo antagonists, and the other scored a bit role on stage with Dr. House, a role that he tackles well with more wit than comedy but still spot on. In this movie both shine and graduate with flying colors.

For hardcore traditionalists even though the protagonist is dressed like a football player with sweet moves, the belle of the film is draped in a prize-winning ribbon as if to remind viewers that she's the prettiest girl on the set, but also has fun with a point made long ago by the American short-story writer Edgar Allan Poe who once penned the words 'The death of a beautiful woman is, unquestionably, the most poetical topic in the world.' And there's an excellent soundtrack to boot.

However, what really makes this a prize-winning catch is the script-writing, along with a few unexpected twists thrown in there to appease the naysayers and the cynics. It's really a great movie. So if you're out there surfing the web for a new horror flick to watch to pass the time, do not miss this opportunity for laughs, shockin' awesome horror, and good old-fashioned family values with a demented weirdo atmosphere, look no further than Gravy. Personally I filed this movie under chance discoveries. Do with it what you will.

Followed (I) (2015)

Unimaginative, uninspired dreck

[3/10 · 8 December 2015]

Where do I begin? There's the found footage angle that is so played out. The only justification for using it these days is if the director is able to come up with a new way to put it good use (e.g. Chronicle, Cloverfield, etc.) otherwise it's plain distracting and a nuisance. Or a cheap gimmick. Followed (2015), starring nobody memorable, directed by M. J. Anderson and written by Casey Cambell, both newcomers who have a long climb ahead of them if they plan on making something remotely original have strung together 83 minutes of suspenseful narrative and uneven dialogue that keeps building and building but goes absolutely nowhere. The final plot twist, the only plot twist, is as unsatisfying as they come these days. It's hard to tell where all the praise for this movie comes from. All I know is that after watching this movie I felt utterly bewildered and confused. It was so bad that had I seen it in theatres I would have demanded they give me my money back. Actually, I would be the one leaving the theatre in a frenzy while muttering curse words under my breath.

Supergirl (2015–2021)

Commendably scripted and well-acted

[8/10 · 23 November 2015]

This seems like the perfect opportunity to start writing reviews for this particular outlet, especially in so far as it furthers my understanding of the divide that exists (uncanny valley?) between movie reviews posted via Online Social Networks (OSN) and online rating sites like this one and reviews published in more traditional mediums usually by so-called "professional" movie critics . This just happens to be one of those cases where there is a marked difference between public opinion and film critics with particular expertise in the subject (allowing for a few exceptions here and there, of course). These days it usually takes something extra in a show for me to be able to prolong a level of interest lasting for more than 3 or 4 episodes (tops). I remained transfixed throughout the first two seasons of Hannibal, for instance, but season 3 just seems to me like overkill (I don't know, maybe it's an American thing; if this was the U.K. they probably would have ended the show earlier; in contrast, Bates Motel, yet another of those rare programs that rise above the riffraff of the age and signal something akin to excellence in broadcasting, could have left off at the end of season two and it would have made for an elaborate and picturesque tableau that captures perfectly the spirit of the "times," but in this case season four is currently in the works and I couldn't be more thrilled).

Enough about me, let's have a look at the data I extracted from three of the biggest aggregator sites for things like film reviews and TV Shows: IMDb, Rotten Tomatoes, and Metacritic. (Brief disclaimer: in no way, shape, or form am I an expert statistician or very good at math, either. I'm an amateur, so, read the article, but take everything I say with a grain of salt.)

According to IMDb's ratings, Supergirl merits a slightly above average score of 6.3 stars at the time this review was posted, which, along with the first three pages of user reviews, obviously does little to demonstrate the appeal of this show. Metacritic measures the show's success based on 33 critics and gives a positive appraisal of its value, with "generally favorable reviews." The show earns a meager score of 4.5 "mixed or average reviews based on 288 Ratings" in the User Reviews category. The same drastic split resurfaces on the Rotten Tomatoes site: the consensus rates it highly at 97%, while the audience score drops down to 52%.

Anyway, after reading so many negative reviews, I figured why not throw in my vote of confidence and maybe help even things out a bit. Final verdict: This show rocks! I just thought you should know.