Change Your Image
bewnhurr
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
2001 Maniacs (2005)
Groovy.
2001 maniacs is essentially a grind house movie if you look at it. The story is the third most important part of the film, after gore and sex. That being said, i do not really mind that since i am a fan of gore myself.
The plot in the movie is not anything new, a bunch of teenagers gets into trouble with the supernatural. You have seen that several times if your a fan of horror. What makes this movie better than average is the fact that it's self avare of it. It doesn't try to be the shining or something like that, instead we get pure grind house fun. The camera is even outdated for the time, a pretty classic grind house team (since they were made on a shoestring budget).
Robert Englund is great as the main villain (As always), the main cast of teens are bad and the acting overall from them is stale and uninspiring. What makes this movie fun to watch is the interaction of the teens (Bad acting) with the townspeople (mostly good acting). The plot moves along with a decent speed so you are never bored with it, and the climax is pretty good.
Another thing that really make it feel like a grind house aside from the gore and the sex are the fact that it is not scared of taking the low road. It's rare to have such strong language in horror movies that are mainstream produced as this one has. "Boy, Negro, Chinaman (Sorry, Chinawoman) and such. Its a movie that doesn't care at all and is just out to entertain you.
Is it better than 2000 maniacs? No, it is. not Is it a bad movie? Yes it is, but it's also a pretty decent one. Once again, that is if you see this movie as a grind house movie, which it really isn't, but there are strong influence by the grind house cinema in it. The best part of this movie is the kills, that isn't anything strange since that's true 90% of the time when there is a body count. But there is also a pretty fun dark humor in this film that doesn't go unnoticed.
Bad Taste (1987)
It is not Evil dead, but it's pretty good.
Giving this title an accurate review is actually hard, and why is that? It's because this is a movie that you should look from two different perspectives really. The first one is the regular movie one. The movie is really cheap with cheap humor and cheap special effects. The second one is the "So good it's bad" one.
Bad taste has always been a movie i enjoy watching, but i know what i get when i watch it. It's not Citizen Kane. But it is not Evil dead 2 either. Its a movie that falls short when it comes to either gore, horror or anything else. That is why i know i am pretty unbiased when it comes to giving this movie a six out of ten.
The movie is crammed by everything in the horror genre. You have zombies that are chasing our heroes, however later we get the insight that they aren't zombies but aliens. Our heroes kills most of the zombies/aliens whom infested the town and move onto the big bad zombie/aliens boss. This is where the movie actually start to get good for me, before this the only skit i found really good was the guy that imitated a machine gun.
This movie is not for everyone i can tell you that right now, its a movie where you have to enjoy a cheap B-movie. As i said, this is not Evil dead where a casual viewer would enjoy it for the comedy. This is a hardcore B-movie in the lines of Plan 9 from outer space or Robot monster.
Ghostbusters (2016)
Bland like dry toast.
What do you get when you take four actors, stick them together and have them all doing their own bit? The answer is a movie that feels more like a skit than a comedy. Combine this fact with marketing campaign that is almost in the lines of Citizen Kane "The movie no one wants you to see" but in this case it's "See the movie or you are a sexist".
Now that we have gotten that whole point out, let's talk about the actual movie. Ghostbusters is a reboot of the entire franchise. The first two movies did not happen and the original cast members that make cameos aren't playing the characters they should.
The comedy is a hit or a miss for most of the times. I personally do not find jokes about slime in every orifice and cracks to be that funny, even if it made me smile a little. The main problem with the humor is that it's not in the style of what i think of when i think Ghostbusters, it's more like a poor mans slapstick with cheap jokes about queefing and penises.
The skit about the stupid male secretary was also flat. The whole "My cat" joke was just horrible, the fish tank joke was just sad. Sadly, the movie is also full of filler scenes that are just here because they do not contribute much to the movie overall. And do not get me started about the nut-shots and other scenes like where they talk about some ghosts virginity. One thing i actually like was the fact that they used the bad CGI as a joke with the whole "Oh it's so fake" skit. But was it really necessary to do it two times? Again, this is a part of the movie that feels like "We're doing it because we need more stuff on film".
Now let's talk about the main bad guy and the ghosts in general, the main bad guy is just a big crybaby that have the power to control human beings, why? Because it's something easy to do. Combine that with the fact that the movie looks down on the audience by having the bad guy explain his plans, like it was convoluted or something like that.
This is a movie where you try to sell the idea more than you try to sell the movie, yes it would be great to see more movies with women as the main name in them but this movie would have been just as bad if there was four random dudes who suited up and went to catch ghosts, and why? That is because the thing that made Ghostbusters good was not the plot or the setting, but the characters and how they were together. All in all, Ghostbusters 2016 is not a good movie. It is not the worst movie i have ever seen and it doesn't deserve all the ones that it has gotten, but it sure doesn't deserve all the tens it got either. It's a summer movie that is there to rake in some cash.
Dawn of the Dead (2004)
cashing in on the hype from 28 days later.
This one is really hard to judge due to the fact that it's a melting pot. It takes the deeper meaning of the original and throw it out of the window in favor of more action packed stuff. It's like Dawn of the dead from 1978 and 28 days later had a baby. They wanted to have the best of both worlds but sadly i just think that i rather watch either the original or 28 days later.
That being said, it's not a bad movie. If i had to describe it, i would say its a mixed bag. The good moments are great and the bad moments are horrible. I think that we could have done well without the montage scene in the middle of the movie, it felt out of place for me. The dark humor is good, i especially like when they are up on the roof and play a game with their rooftop neighbor shooting famous zombies (or Look-alikes).
The movie start out good, but as it progresses i lost interest. Mainly because i did not care for our main cast except for CJ played by Michael Kelly. I can understand if people like this movie more than i did, i have friends who think that it surpasses the original because the original is a very slow movie with tons of buildup.
For me personally it comes down to the running zombies. Some people like them more, some people like them less (Me included). While i did enjoy 28 days later, fast zombies remove the feel of dread from the lurking zombies. It just seems easier to create a real threat with running zombies. If the zombies are slow like in the original, you can take it out without a problem. Here however even a single zombie can be a real threat. Once again, this is a personal taste and i can see why people like the running zombies.
It (1990)
BEEP BEEP Tommy Lee Wallace.
Stephen King is no doubt a great writer. The main problem with this adaptation is the same problem as "The Stand" had. When you work with a source material this big, corners will get cut, and sometimes very badly.
Part one takes place in the late 50's. There are seven boys and one girl who doesn't belong anywhere, they are the Losers' club. In this part we get to know the gang and we get to see how they end up knowing Pennywise the dancing clown (Tim Curry). I really hate that the cut out some of the best stuff from the book, like when Bill and Richie confronts Pennywise under a house, or when the entire club does the same later. The famous smokehouse is not there, nor is the only kid in town crazier then Henry.
The acting in part one is well done, Henry was spot on with what i imagined him to look like when i first read the book back in 92. Derry looks pretty much what i expect it to look except for no shots of the channel where Jaws later should do a cameo.
Part two is a mixed bag, it's actually decent good up to the part where Henry escapes to booby hatch. Most people complain about the giant spider that is Pennywise true form in this movie, and that is understandable. In the book there is a whole different story with the deadlights.
My main problem is the changes they made that was not even needed. Why could not Eddie have run into the leaper instead of the silly shower scene? Why did they change Bens mummy to a his dead dad just to use a mummy for Stan (instead of the drowned boys in the standpipe). There are some parts that are understandable due to budget (Paul Bunyan being one of them). But they butchered some parts that did not need any butchering. This points are also true when they are grownups.
What i missed the most was the interludes that are in the book. I would have loved to see the Bradley gang gunned down, or a mad lumberjack chopping people into peace. I would say that if you have seen this miniseries, do yourself a favor and read the novel as soon as you get time.
All in all this series has a great start and the entire first part is actually good despite the changes, but as it drags on you start to think that you are losing interest bit by bit. This one really got hurt by the butchering.
The Mothman Prophecies (2002)
A throwback to the 50's suspense thrillers
Well, this sure was an interesting movie. First of all, if you are a someone who really hates a horror movie (even if i would not use that term for this movie) where the monster is never or rarely shows, you probably will not enjoy this movie.
If you are however a fan of the older movies where the monster is rarely shows (like Cat People from 1942) you will enjoy it. Sometimes it's better to concentrate on the story rather than the monster, and in this movie i think they made the right choice to have the monster take a backseat to the rest of the cast.
The story is at first center on a reporter named John Klein and his adventures with the supernatural in the west point area. Things take a turn to the supernatural when people start to hear voices, see strange things and get a glimpse of what may happen. During the time he spends in town we start to feel badly for him because the supernatural is starting to target him, driving him close to the brink of madness at some point.
Richard Gere does a good job as John Klein with the exception of a few scenes where he hams it up and the rest of the cast all do a pretty good job. The movie has its ups and downs, but in the end it's a pretty good story. The atmosphere of the movie is not scary at all, but the story managed to stay well to the end, except for the very end.
Amusement (2008)
It doesn't deliver anything.
Amusement is a mediocre horror/thriller movie about a psychopath that stalks three girls that he went to school with. Sounds familiar? This is basically the premise of a mediocre slasher from the 80's combined with torture porn (Without any of the bloodshed).
The strong point of the movie is that the killer does a decent job portraying a madman. However the downsides include bad acting from the rest of the crew. The movie plays out like an anthology series before reaching the climax at the end where all three girls are trapped with the madman.
In typical fashion the killer is an idiot and the victims are equally stupid. During one scene in the end you more or less find yourself almost rooting for the killer to catch them all since they are so stupid.
The first segment starts out good with a truck driver that has something to hide. The second episode is pretty bad, it was a dead give away from the start since you by now know its in the anthology format. The third segment was also sadly obvious. There is a huge chunk of the movie that remains unexplained, but that might be good because it saved me another 30 minutes of this movie.
I think that the biggest problem for this movie that it's just mediocre. It takes itself serious but do not deliver what you want from a slasher movie. The body count and deaths are all bad. There is no decent gore or anything.
This is just a waste of time. I am just glad that i did catch it on TV and did not pay a dime to watch this. With another cast and a change of format it might have something worth the time, but this did not work at all in anthology format.
Mutant World (2014)
Almost so bad it's good.
Well. What could you say about movies likes this. There is a lot of unintentional humor, cheesy acting where the plot movies around with horrible cuts and really cheesy special effects.
This is a pretty bad movie overall, you could tell from the start where they gun down people that you would be in for a really camp fest (which is not always something bad). As the movies progressed and i first saw the mutants i laughed my ass off (the unintentional humor). As our band of heroes comes into contact with the first people they have seen since they took shelter in the bunker ten years ago we can tell that they are up to no good (I have seen enough survival movies to know that if something seems to good to be true it probably is).
This is where we laugh are asses off again. When the dude is about the get lucky the woman turns and bite his finger off while the rest of the town goes crazy. This is where the mutant king comes into play. Out of nowhere he shows sympathy for one human and fight of other mutants. As the brawl keeps on going the main characters screw up hard. The climax is just an explosion with some burning mutants.
The ending was also cheesy with no real explanation how a certain character was still alive. If this was done with more humor you could pass it of as somewhat decent b-movie since the mutants just looked silly except for the king mutant.
All in all it was a "So bad it's good" kind of movie, albeit in the lower spectrum of that kind of movies.