At the Movies 2015: Jurassic World

Posted on July 5, 2015 by cornholio1980

Jurassic WorldJurassic World
USA 2015
Written by Rick Jaffa , Amanda Silver, Derek Connolly & Colin Trevorrow
Directed by Colin Trevorrow
Watched on 17.06.2015

Since I didn’t find the time to re-watch (and thus review) the trilogy, let’s do a short recap: “Jurassic Park” is a masterpiece, and Steven Spielberg’s last perfect blockbuster (10/10). “The Lost World” is a delightfully distinct movie with some tremendously gripping scenes (like the trailer) and a great ending (yes, I’m actually one of those who really liked the ending in San Diego), but which still falls short of the original (7/10). And “Jurassic Park III” can be found in the dictionary under “unworthy sequel”; it was just an utilization of leftovers, and a complete misfire (3/10). As for “Jurassic World”, it’s mostly an exercise in nostalgia – but that doesn’t have to be a bad thing, and in this case, it indeed isn’t.

From all the sequels, this is the closest to the original, which is at the same time its biggest strength and its biggest weakness. Strength, because some of the best moments of the movie are those that allude to “Jurassic Park”. Weakness, because it also means that “Jurassic World” frequently reminds us of an ultimately better movie. What I liked most about it, is the concept. I have to say, in hindsight it seems almost strange that it took them three sequels to go there. I would have seemed like the logical next step after the first one. Anyway, I really loved the beginning of the movie, where we come to Jurassic World. There’s something very elevating about seeing John Hammonds vision finally fulfilled – even though we know that it can’t and won’t last long. Prior to seeing the movie, one of the things that had me very concerned was the new dinosaur, since I feared another Spinosaurus-debacle. The problem there, of course, was not that they featured it as the new baddie of “Jurassic Park III”, but rather how they featured it. Trying to tell us that it’s bigger, badder and meaner by letting it kill the T-Rex in a 1-minute-battle was just offensive. He’s not the king of dinosaurs because of some movie appearance, he’s been the figurehead of dinosaurs for as long as mankind – and young kids in particular – have been fascinated by them. You just can’t extinguish a legacy like that in one single scene. You can give us a bigger and meaner dinosaur, but that doesn’t necessarily also make it a better/cooler one. The T-Rex will always be the icon of dinosaurs, period. Thankfully, Colin Trevorrow understands that. Yes, he gives us a new baddie in the Indominous Rex, but he’s not there to replace the T-Rex. With that alone, he shows a bigger understanding of why “Jurassic Park” worked so well, than Joe Johnston did during his entire (misguided) attempt – and the movie is all the better for it.

I also really liked how “Jurassic World” mixed the old with the new. Yes, there are some very nostalgic scenes, and some great references to the first one, but they don’t simply content themselves with offering just a nostalgic trip into the (cinematic) past. Instead, they also present some new and fresh ideas, like the training of the Velociraptors. This was another element that I was very sceptical about beforehand, however, I needn’t have worried. The raptors are still very much extremely dangerous creatures, and the alliance that Owen forges with them is an uneasy one. They are also only let loose as a last resort. And, without giving too much away, things don’t necessarily go as planned. Anyway, everyone who feared that our favorite “Jurassic Park”-baddies would become harmless pets can rest assured. Another plus was the nice meta-level, with Claire talking about how simply offering the audience some dinosaurs isn’t enough any more – which obviously didn’t just apply to the visitors of the park, but also the cinemagoers. There were also a couple of really great individual scenes (which I don’t want to spoil). I also quite liked the banter between Owen and Claire. One could say that romances like that are a standard element of modern blockbusters; however, we actually never had something like that in the “Jurassic Park”-films, thus I thought it was an interesting approach. Finally, Michael Giacchino’s score was just wonderful. He’s not above citing John Williams’ iconic theme when its appropriate, which is definitely a big plus. However, I also quite liked the new theme, and his material in general. Like the rest of the movie, he perfectly mixed the old with the new.

One aspect where they unfortunately stray from the tradition of the trilogy are the effects, who, apart from one significant deviation, come solely out of the PC. Now, mind you, the CGI does look way better than it did in the trailer (even though the Mesosaurus still isn’t something to write home about, effects-wise), and especially the Raptors and the T-Rex were extremely well done. The Indominous Rex looked quite good, too. However, there are some shots where it’s just CGI-overkill. And overall, I really would have preferred if they would have used animatronics whenever possible. I didn’t expect them to build a life-sized T-Rex or I-Rex (since that would be far more expensive than just doing it on the computer), but how about building just the head, so that you can use it in some of the more dramatic, close-up moments? So unfortunately, in this regard, “Jurassic World” shows one of the huge failings of modern blockbusters, compared to the movie it so much aspires to. In “Jurassic Park”, Spielberg used CGI as a last resort. Nowadays, it’s used all the friggin’ time, because it’s cheaper and easier. However, due to that, you lose some of the magic of the blockbusters of old. Also, the whole movie has a very typical, shiny, bright modern blockbuster look/sheen to it, which also sets it apart from the original that it tries to imitate. And as good as the effects were, overall, there also were a couple of scenes where “Jurassic World” unfortunately looked a little fake. Lastly, I really could have done without Hoskins, who seemed like a rather unnecessary (villainous) character, and who didn’t really add anything to the movie. Overall, though, I enjoyed this nostalgic trip to “Jurassic World” more than I thought I would.
7/10

For all readers who understand german, you can find my even more elaborate fictionBOX-review here. Also, my buddy Maynard reviewed “Jurassic World” as well, and even added short reviews of the entire trilogy. For once, we’re actually pretty much in agreement!


IMDB

Posted in cinema 2015, movie reviews, new releases | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Screener-Review: The Sky Has Fallen

Posted on July 2, 2015 by cornholio1980

The Sky Has FallenThe Sky Has Fallen
USA 2009
Written by Doug Roos
Directed by Doug Roos
Watched on 30.06.2015

“The Sky Has Fallen” takes various well-known concepts, ideas and tropes, gives them a good shake, and out comes a very recommendable indie-horror-flick that feels quite fresh and original – even though all those elements don’t always add up to a coherent whole. I have to say, given the micro-budget-origins of this movie, I was really surprised of how well it holds up to other horror flicks. Of course the low budget is noticeable here and there – especially in the way the action is shot, with cuts to gory close-ups of blood and guts spilling, cut-off arms, and so on, all the friggin’ time – but the (amateur) actors do a very decent job, it has a nice bleak atmosphere, the setting is incredibly grim, and the movie itself looks pretty good, thanks to great camera work by writer, director, editor and cinematographer Doug Ross. I also really appreciated the nostalgic approach to special effects, which relied solely on practical gore, without any CGI whatsoever. Thus, “The Sky Has Fallen”, even though produced in 2009, feels like a long-lost movie from the 70s or 80s – and yes, that’s a compliment.

I also really digged the story. Not because it was incredibly complex and/or original or anything, but because I found it to be really gripping. It successfully mixes a typical revenge/man-on-a-mission-flick with a zombie apocalypse, which made for an interesting pairing. I also really liked the lead characters, Lance and Rachel. Carey MacLaren and Laurel Kemper – both so good (for non-professionals) in their individual roles that I was surprised to see that they hardly worked as actors ever since – have great chemistry together, and the longer the movie progressed, the more and more I felt quite attached to their characters. At the beginning, both of them are a complete mystery to us. But as the movie progresses, we learn more and more about them, sometimes through them telling us their story, and sometimes also in what they obviously don’t tell us/each other (which is occasionally hinted at in very short flashback images) – which can be just as revealing. And of course, ultimately, as soon as we close in on the end, we finally get to know what happened to them at the night of the outbreak, and thus what motivates them. Those were some of my favorite moments of the film, mostly because they were very dark and grim. But even apart from those, there are a couple of really nice moments throughout that really stood out for me, like when Lance contemplates killing Rachel, the reading of the priest’s diary, or the great ending. Finally, when it comes to brutality, “The Sky Has Fallen” really pulls no punches, offering a lot of – well-made – gore.

On the downside, I found “The Sky Has Fallen” to be a little confusing. For example, why do the shapes kill some people right away, but bind others to a tree, and for what purpose? I also think that as rich in variety as the movie is thanks to the shitload of ideas that were thrown together here, it’s almost too much (the zombies, the shapes, the alien hands, the nightmarish visions, the outbreaks of excessive violence, the traps set by surviving humans, the biblical implications, and so on). I also really could have done without all those scenes with random victims getting torn to pieces, which really felt gratuitous, and like an unnecessary excess in blood and gore. Also, the action is the one part of the movie that suffers the most from the micro-budget, since it’s chopped up in very little pieces, without any flow to the movements; thus, it was actually kinda hard for me to follow. It seemed like random shots cobbled together, and also got quite repetitive after a while, since it’s always the same: Lance is moving his sword – cut to some close-up gore, Rachel is shooting her gun – cut to some close-up gore, Lance is slashing again – cut to some close-up gore… and so on. The cuts followed so fast at times that it occasionally started to drive me insane. Finally, I really could have done without the revelation at the end, which seemed a little too far-fetched and silly to me (then again, it’s totally possible that she was just lying, in order to comfort him; an explanation that I would very much prefer). As far as non-budget indie-horror-movies go, though, “The Sky Has Fallen” is a very competent and highly enjoyable effort.
7/10


IMDB

Posted in movie reviews, screener | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Screener-Review: Throwback

Posted on July 1, 2015 by cornholio1980

ThrowbackThrowback
AUS 2014
Written by Travis Bain
Directed by Travis Bain
Watched on 29.06.2015

While I’ve written movie reviews for about ten years now (until a short while ago, however, exclusively in german), I only started this (english) blog in earnest a little less than a year ago. Now, slowly, the first screener-offers start to come in. The first thing that I write back when someone contacts me, is “giving me a screener will not guarantee you a good review” (which I kinda stole from Maynard’s “Horror Movie Diary”). In other words: I’m not in the habit of writing glowing reviews for shitty movies in order to get more free shitty movies – since that just seems counter-intuitive to me ;-). And while I would not call “Throwback” a shitty movie, it nevertheless is the first time that I have to make good on that promise, since while I can commend Travis Bain for his intentions, committment, and perseverance, I unfortunately cannot really commend him for the final product.

“Throwback”‘s first offence is that it never, ever, even remotely lives up to that glorious poster, which makes it look way cooler than it actually is. Its second problem is that its a monster movie without a monster. Now don’t get me wrong, I like getting teased as much as the next guy. It’s an integral part of horror movies, and I think that it’s a shame that many modern horror movies seem to have forgotten the art of the tease. The best example for me still is and always will be “Jaws”. Yes, the fact that we see the shark so late in the game may partly be due to the fact that the shark wasn’t working as well as they’d hoped, but whatever the reason, it builds up an enormous expectation – that is then also met when they ultimately, finally, show it to us in all its glory. Obviously, though, for a money shot like that you first and foremost need money, which Travis Bain didn’t really have here, so all that you ever get are glimpses here and there. “Throwback” is like a stripper: Teasing you, but without any pay-off whatsoever. Its third and biggest offence, however, was the way this was shot. I for one am extremely sensitive when it comes to a cheap digital look. I grew up with TV and movies, and since I was a little kid, this certain distinction between the way a movie and/or series looks, compared to how “Live TV” looks, is engraved in my brain. Which is why, after giving it a try with “The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey”, I never ever in my entire life will go to another HFR-screening. Maybe it’s something about my eyes, or it’s because I’ve been programmed to see this distinction right away, but for me, this kind of look is extremely noticeable. Now I don’t know what camera was used to shoot “Throwback”. All I know is that it looks like it was shot with a regular hobby-filmmaker-DV-cam, and thus looks like an amateur holiday video. Thus, it never felt like a “real” movie to me. (And before you ask: Yes, I had a similar problem with “Public Enemies”, so this hasn’t really got anything to do with the fact that this is a low-budget-production.)

There are a couple of other problems, too. For example, I actually thought that the prologue of the movie was its most interesting part, and I wouldn’t have minded if we would have stayed in that time period for the rest of the movie. A) because it would have set it apart from all the countless other similar movies, and B) because there was a sense of fun and tongue-in-cheekiness to those scenes that I felt was sadly missing afterwards – where, in my mind, the movie took itself way too seriously. Also, the present-day-characters, unfortunately, weren’t all that exciting. They were hardly sketched out at all, and what little information we got about them made them feel rather clichéd. You have the good guy, the damsel in distress, and the crazy/bad/dangerous fellow. Jack is actually the one that gets the most attention, and thus at least partially comes off like a real person. Kent, however, seems like a caricature, and unfortunately, we never really learn something about his motivations, other than “If I kill him, I don’t have to share the loot”. And Rhiannon barely registers at all; I don’t remember one scene where we learn more about her than we already glance from the first shot of her, which shows us that she’s a ranger. And that’s it. I also never really felt any connection, let alone attraction, between her and Jack. Also, the acting is sub-par. Now, that’s something that I almost expect from an indie-movie like that, so it wasn’t a big deal, but it’s not helping the movie either. Same is true about some rather bad choices that the characters make. For example, there’s the scene where Kent gets handcuffed to a tree root, and after trying to free himself for a couple of seconds, he sees a big rock next to him. But instead of at least trying to cut the root first, he – without any imminent danger – rather goes ahead and smashes his hand. There’s also the scene where Jack hides from the Yowie under water, but when it finds him, instead of swimming away (it was established before that the beast doesn’t really like water), he stares at it like a deer stares into the light. I also didn’t understand some of the actions of the Yowie. Some people he kills right away, and others, he only hurts – or, in Rhiannon’s case, captures. And talking about Rhiannon – don’t even let me get started on her attack on Kent with a small stone, where she, instead of punching him again and again and taking away his gun, rather walks away after the first hit.

Finally, I’m also a little torn about Vernon Well’s cameo. On the one hand, it’s one of the best scenes of the movie, since there, “Throwback” comes alive in a way that it hardly ever achieved during the rest of the running time. On the other hand, his professional acting makes the amateurish performances of the rest of the cast only more noticeable. Mostly, though, his character ultimately has absolutely no impact on the plot whatsoever. You take him out, and apart from the smashed hand (which never really was brought up again anyway), nothing about the way the movie progresses changes. Which makes his appearance rather pointless (apart from the publicity his name on the poster and in the trailer generates, of course). Having said all that, “Throwback” nevertheless isn’t without its merits. As mentioned before, I really liked the first couple of minutes, which were set in the past. However, there are also a couple of nice scenes later in the game, like the one where Jack is stuck between a rock (Kent with a gun) and a hard place (the Yowie), while hiding under a tree trunk in the water. There is the occasional gag that hits home. The music was pretty good, too. And as much as it might have disappointed me that we never really got to see the Yowie (which, on the other hand, given the slim-to-none budget of the movie, might have been a godsend, since if they would have shown it, the movie would have probably fallen apart instantly), Travis Bain at least hides him in interesting – and varying – ways. Sometimes he’s hidden behind the characters or the trees, sometimes he’s out of focus, sometimes we only see a shape because the camera looks directly into the sun, and sometimes we just get to see a hand or a piece of fur because it’s an extreme close-up. All in all, the way he managed to hide it the whole movie without it getting stale was impressive. And, finally, while the movie – at least in my view – might suffer from the camera that was used, Travis Bain’s staging of his shots was flawless. There were a couple of nice images, taken from different and/or weird angles, that really stood out. He definitely knows where to put the camera in order to get interesting and/or impressive shots, and he also captures the beauty of the landscape really well. Ultimately, this was the part of the movie that showed the biggest promise. With a better camera, professional actors, and some help with the script, his next movie could very well end up being really good. “Throwback”, however, unfortunately didn’t really manage to impress me.
3/10

Travis Bain is currently collecting money on Kickstarter to finance his next project, “Starspawn”, an (in his own words) “H.P. Lovecraft-inspired sci-fi/horror film”. And despite my reserved reaction to “Throwback”, I decided to throw a couple of bucks his way (hopefully he’ll use them to get a better camera 😉 ). Maybe you wanna follow my lead? Also, if you love indie- and/or creature-horror movies, and aren’t such an uptight snob such as myself when it comes to a noticeable digital look, you might want to consider buying and/or renting “Throwback” after all (despite my less-than-glowing review), which is currently available on DVD/Blu-Ray in Australia, England, Canada and the US. And if you do, please consider telling me what you thought about it in the comments.


IMDB

Posted in movie reviews, screener | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Project Terrible: Hercules

Posted on June 29, 2015 by cornholio1980

HerculesHercules
USA 1983
Written by Lewis Coates
Directed by Lewis Coates
Watched on 25.06.2015

Ok, so here’s the deal: I decided to watch my Project Terrible-assignments in that order which I thought would bring me decreasing pain with each passing movie. Thus, I started with the movie that I was looking forward to the least, and ended with the movie that I was the most hopeful about. Well, that didn’t exactly work out as planned, since “Rappin'” – which I expected to hate – was actually the movie that I liked best of the bunch, while “Hercules” (which I kept for last), turned out to be far less entertaining than I had expected.

The main reason why I had at least moderate hopes for this one was that I actually kinda like “Masters of the Universe” (don’t judge me, please), and this seemed to be cut from the same cloth. Now, of course, contrary to “Hercules”, I actually grew up with “Masters of the Universe” (which, in a home were “purchase”-VHS-tapes of movies were practically non-existent [we had a VHS recorder, but only blank tapes which we then used to record things off from TV] and the TV stations hardly ever showed “Star Wars”, ended up being my substitute drug), which gives it the nostalgic edge. And I guess, had I grown up with “Hercules”, I might have liked it a little bit more. Then again, it’s definitely not even a “Masters of the Universe” – and that’s saying something. Because whatever you may think of Dolph Lundgren’s turn as He-Man, and I know that there are a lot of people who loathe the movie, but at least they tried. They had a solid budget, a nice cast, decent costumes and effects, and a serviceable story. “Hercules”, unfortunately, has none of that. The only things that it shares with “Masters of the Universe” are the weird mixture of SF- and Fantasy-elements, as well as an overall silliness. However, where I found that quite charming in the latter, here it mostly didn’t work for me. Thus, while “Hercules” seemingly tries to fall somewhere between “Superman” and “Flash Gordon” (with shades of “Conan”), it instead only barely manages to better Cannon Films own “Superman”-sequel, “The Quest for Peace”. And that really isn’t saying much.

Granted, with a sufficiently high trash-tolerance-level, there’s some fun to be had here. Scenes like Hercules’ fight with the bear (which he then throws into space, where he ends up building the star constellation “Greater Bear”), the way he cleans the stables within a couple of minutes (by redirecting a river that then runs through it; and after all that water, the staples even sparkle like in those cheap detergent-commercials!), the ridiculously big moon in the background, the rainbow that leads to the gates of hell, the chariot-ride into space, the bad dubbing of Lou Ferrigno, the constant over-acting of William Berger as King Minos (“Science! For the sake of science!”), as well as a couple of terrible lines (“Your groom is eager to inflame your passions.” – right before he lowers her into the volcano) make this occasionally (and, I assume, unintentionally) funny, and thus at least bearable. Also, the score is alright, and scenes with the Atlantis-model (even though it was clearly recognizable as such) actually didn’t look all that bad. Nevertheless, the bad far outweighs the good, I’m afraid. It already started off rather unpromising, with the extremely weird prologue where the narrator tells us that the universe was created with the four main elements “Night, Day, Matter and Air” (What?!). Apart from Atlantis, the effects were laughable, and were extremely outdated even back then. The flaming sword looked especially bad (which was especially damning since that was the showdown of the movie, after all!), and the metallic monsters (where they seemingly tried to copy Harryhausen, but without a fraction of his aptitude and craftmanship), while bringing a certain a steampunk-element to it, had absolutely no charm at all.

It also didn’t help that a couple of scenes – like the one where the blades of the chariots simply break when they get into contact with Hercules, leaving not even a scratch – made him look invincible, which not only completely took out any tension that the movie otherwise might have had, but also made Circe’s sacrifice (one of the funniest death scenes that I’ve seen in a long time) seem totally unnecessary (she throws herself into the blast of the metallic monster, and a couple of seconds later, Hercules himself is hit, but remains unhurt). Also, the movie misses a sense of adventure and fun. It also takes far too long for Hercules to finally reach Atlantis. The narrator was completely unnecessary. And the damsel in distress, Cassiopeia, definitely could have put up a little bit more of a fight. In the end, they bring her into the sacrificial chamber, and she doesn’t even struggle or anything. I guess she didn’t have anything better to do anyway. And also, the bad guy didn’t make any sense. On the one hand, he praises science, and on the other hand, he plans to throw the virgin into the volcano in order to prevent its eruption – which doesn’t seem very scientific to me. Ultimately, though, it all boils down to this: They simply didn’t have the necessary budget to successfully accomplish what they tried to do here. While you don’t need that much money for all those cheap B-action-movies that Cannon Films threw out back then, a fantasy-movie has far higher demands, budget-wise. “Hercules” is 80% ambition, and only 20% achievement; and even from those, 10% stem from the unintentional hilarity of it all. Sadly, I actually prefer the lousy Ratner/The Rock “Hercules” to this – and that really is a shame.
2/10


IMDB

Posted in movie reviews, Project Terrible | Tagged , , , , | 7 Comments

Project Terrible: Bolero

Posted on June 27, 2015 by cornholio1980

BoleroBolero
USA 1984
Written by John Derek
Directed by John Derek
Watched on 06.06.2015

Here’s why I called Maynard a devious bastard in my Project Terrible-announcement post. As I mentioned before, I had the idea of participating after watching the (recommendable) Cannon Films-documentary “Electric Boogaloo”. One of the movies that got my attention was “Bolero”, a movie that, from the plot-description and a couple of scenes, looked absolutely terrible. The day after I watched the documentary was the day of my awesome android-double-feature (“Ex Machina” and “Blade Runner”) with Maynard, and I told him everything about it, and how bad “Bolero” looked. So when it was time to assign me a film out of the hundreds that Cannon Films and affiliates put out, which one did he give me? Right. I’d say, under those circumstances, “devious bastard” was putting it mildly.

After this piece of exposition, let’s deal with the movie itself. Now, I really wish that I could give it the thumbs up, just as Bo Derek does about 2/3rds in, in what is possibly the most infamous scene of the movie. Unfortunately, “Bolero” was neither good nor bad enough for that. It was a decidedly mixed bag, with a couple of things that really annoyed me, but never bad enough to really incur my wrath. Plus, waddayaknow, there were actually a couple of things that I liked. What I loved most is that “Bolero” portrays an independent, self-determined woman. Granted, she’s a bombshell whose main determination is to get laid, so even the most anti-feminist guy probably won’t have much of a problem with that, but still, this is a woman who knows what she wants (mostly sexually), and actually sets out to do it. Now, granted, the way they handle it is pretty ridiculous: She and her best friend are huge fans of a sweeping adventure/romance movie that depicts a Sheik falling in love with a young foreign girl, and it’s so glorious and romantic and sweet and exciting that Lida sets her mind on going to egypt and get deflowered by a sheik, right after she’s done with boarding school (and, apparently, inherits a shitload of money). Now, as beautiful as Bo Derek was back then, the first stretch here, obviously, is to buy into her being that young (and a virgin). And, of course, the whole idea is silly beyond belief. I guess she can consider herself lucky that she’s not living in the present, where she would either go after a sparkling vampire (who might be hard do find) or a rich sadistic bastard (probably a little easier to track down, but potentially even less pleasant).

Seriously, though, as much as I make fun of it, and as silly as it may sound (and be), I really like that this is very much in the tradition of 70s erotic cinema (see: Emmanuelle), putting the wants, needs and desires of a woman – instead of a man – in the foreground, and also not punishing her for her desires like it’s common in other genres like, for example, slasher movies. You may think it’s silly, and the characters may think it’s silly, but Lida as a character is never made fun of by the movie itself, and the other characters never think less of her, just because she travels the world simply to loose her virginity. Her body, her money, her decision. So overall, there’s quite a feminist touch in here – which is also not limited solely to her sexual awakening. For example, after Angel’s accident, it’s very much Lida who wears the pants (figuratively and literally), and in the end, she even braves the very manly domain of bullfighting (while her friend pretty much takes over the business side of Angel’s company). That said bullfighting happens in an as-animal-friendly-as-possible kinda way (instead of actually hurting the bull, they’re sticking the spears on a pad that’s fastened to his back, like a saddle) is another plus. Also, there are a couple of (intentionally) funny scenes, especially at the beginning, like Lida’s night with the Sheik, which doesn’t really go as planned. Also, the egypt-scenes offer up some beautiful imagery, as well as a couple of imaginative scenes (like presenting parts of her account of their first night like a silent movie). The longer the movie progresses though, the more and more UNintentionally funny it gets. Then again, that’s insofar a bold statement as there were many moments where I really didn’t know if they were supposed to be funny, or not. This IS an erotic comedy, after all. I mean, there’s stuff in here that you simply cannot take seriously.

Take the final sex scene for example. The entire movie, Lida’s looking for ecstasy. She even has a quarrel with her friend, which insists it’s spelled extasy. So in the end, when she – with the magical power of Bo Derek’s sexiness – made Angel’s schlong work again, it’s shot in a very dreamlike fashion, with fog all around, until finally a huge neon-sign pops up in the background, with “ecstasy” written on it. And as if that wouldn’t have been enough, she even comments on how she was right with the spelling after all (which seemed to kinda contradict the fact that she experiences total ecstasy in that moment; it seemed more like the bad joke of the woman who, during sex, looks up and says “the ceiling could use a paint job.”). The final strength of the movie – obviously – is the nudity. They definitely pull no punches, and already serve their first boobs within the first five minutes. Bo Derek is especially revealing – as usual, at least back then – and for all pedophile’s out there, you’re actually able to ogle at a nude 13-something Olivia d’Abo (which really made me feel like a perv). However, the longer the movie progresses, the more it loses steam. There are a couple of long stretches without a laugh (intentionally or unintentionally), without any eroticism, without ANYTHING really. Those were quite hard to get through, and actually made me rather sleepy. Also, as good a job “Bolero” is doing in presenting a self-determined woman, it’s rather terrible when it comes to portraying other cultures, constantly being on the cusp of racism, and in at least one instance – the gypsies – clearly crossing that line. Add to that some terrible acting, horrible dialogues, an appearance by George Kennedy which really made me feel sorry for him (seriously, what the hell were you thinking, Mister?), and a couple of truly cringeworthy scenes, and you got yourself a movie that – despite the nudity, some sillily entertaining moments and the overall trashy charm of it – very much deserved to be a part of “Project Terrible”.
3/10


IMDB

Posted in movie reviews, Project Terrible | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Project Terrible: Mako – The Jaws of Death

Posted on June 12, 2015 by cornholio1980

Mako The Jaws of DeathMako: The Jaws of Death
USA 1976
Written by William Grefé & Robert Madaris
Directed by William Grefé
Watched on 04.06.2015

“Mako: The Jaws of Death” was assigned to me by Michele, and while she suggested in her e-mail that she’s not particularly good at picking terrible movies, in this case, she actually did a splendid job. Which, of course, was the general idea. However, my main problem with “Mako: The Jaws of Death” was not that it was pretty bad, but rather that, apart from one intriguingly crazy (and crazily intriguing) idea as well as the fact that it sooooo totally fails to deliver the message that it seemingly wanted to impart, it’s rather unremarkable.

After the huge success of “Jaws”, there were a lot of free riders who tried to earn some easy money in its wake. And the one thing that I have to hold in “Mako: The Jaws of Death”‘s favor is that, even though it’s definitely Cannon Films’ attempt to get their share of the shark-craze, it isn’t a simple imitation of Steven Spielberg’s masterpiece. They actually tried to do something new/different here, since the main bad guy isn’t the shark, but the human(s). Which, in itself, is genius, and a very welcome change of pace after “Jaws” (a movie that I absolutely adore) and so many other movies afterwards demonized them. However, there are two major problems with the end result: A) they totally failed in what they tried to do here, and B) the main idea of a mysterious mental connection between a man and “his” sharks, due to a mystical medallion, was just a tad too far-out for me to really get into the movie (now, granted, there’s the slight possibility that it’s all in his head, but I do believe that the ending with the medallion strongly suggests that he wasn’t crazy after all – well, at least not when it comes to that). I’m generally having a hard time with supernatural elements in movies (at least as long as they are set in the “real world”), and that simply was a little bit too much for me. Granted, it’s a new and somehow neat idea, and I’m sure it’s just crazy enough for some to work – but unfortunately it didn’t for me.

That alone wouldn’t be that much of a problem, though, even though it meant that “Mako: The Jaws of Death” and me were off to a rough start pretty much from the get-go. One of the main problems of the movie, however, lies in the way Sonny Stein is portrayed. He’s supposed to be the main protagonist, the guy we root for – and within the first three minutes, he has already killed three guys. Now, granted, they were bastards who tried to hunt sharks just for fun and/or profit, which definitely is not ok, but still, I don’t see how Sonny injuring them and throwing them into the water so that his shark friends can feast on them makes him any better than the despicable pricks he disposes of. However, in the way the movie progresses, how everyone’s talking about (and with) him (“You are a sickie!” is now my favorite insult), and how he’s screwed over by the people that he trusts with his sharks, it’s obvious that the movie tries to build him up as the hero of the piece – which simply didn’t work for me. Also: On multiple occasions, “Mako: The Jaws of Death” seems to decry the belief held back then by some (and arguably reinforced by “Jaws”) that sharks are dangerous, heinous, man-eating killing machines. Too bad, though, that the movie actually depicts them as – you guessed it – dangerous, heinous, man-eating killing machines, since they gladly devour every human morsel that Sonny throws to them [SPOILER] (and in the end, since he has disposed of his medallion that seemingly was treated with a variant of Batman’s shark repellent spray, even himself)[/SPOILER]. Rarely have I seen a movie with such a discrepancy between what it tries to say and what it actually says. It’s almost worth watching just for that. Mind you, I said “almost”.

I’m afraid I can’t really assess as to how well the movie was shot, since the version that I saw (you can actually find it for free on YouTube) seems to have been taped off from an old VHS-tape which already was in pretty bad shape. Thus, the whole movie had a terrible blue tint to it. There were also a couple of scenes where I had a hard time figuring out what was happening on-screen. It’s too bad that there’s not a reasonably priced opportunity to see it (and I’m sorry, but I’m not going to pay fifty dollars for a used DVD for a movie like this, thankyouverymuch), but we make due with what we’ve got. However, because of that, I really have to reserve judgment when it comes to the look of the movie (in contrast to the music, which was absolutely terrible, no doubt about it). However, the version that I saw definitely was one of the worst copies of a film that I’ve ever seen, which probably didn’t help; on the other hand, though, I’m not sure if it really would have made that much of a difference if I would have held a pristine Blu-Ray in my hands, since the main problems lie with the content of the movie anyway. Now, granted, there were a couple of good scenes. I liked Sonny’s tale, since it seemed to hark back to Quint’s telling of the fate of the U.S.S. Indianapolis – only in this case, he was actually saved by sharks. That was a nice spin. Also, Richard Jaeckel really gave it his all. And the underwater shark scenes were quite nice (even though if you want to see something like that, I suggest you rather go ahead and put in a nature documentary). Ultimately, though, this shark was not working.
2/10


IMDB

Posted in movie reviews, Project Terrible | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Project Terrible: Rappin’

Posted on June 5, 2015 by cornholio1980

RappinRappin’
USA 1985
Written by Adam Friedman & Robert Litz
Directed by Joel Silberg
Watched on 02.06.2015

My first thought after Alec – who I hadn’t had any contact with before I joined Project Terrible – who of all the 200+ movies that Cannon Films and its affiliates produced or distributed, assigned “Rappin'” to me, was: How the fuck did he know that I loathe rap music? 😛 To my own big surprise, though, I ended up actually kinda likin’ it. It’s not a good movie – not by a long shot – but at least, its heart is in the right place. Thus, even thought it ultimately ended up short, you can at least say: “Well, they tried.”

There’s a lot of discussion going on right now about diversity in Hollywood, and how – a couple of franchises like “Fast & Furious” notwithstanding – non-white ethnicities are still very much underrepresented in movies, and are often reduced to the (comedic) sidekick of a hero/main protagonist. So one of the things that I found pleasantly surprising is how this is so not an issue here; in a movie that, one should point out, is now 30 years old. “Rappin'” features a huge variety of characters from different ethnic and cultural backgrounds – afro-american, caucasian, mexican, italian, greek and so on – who, apart from a couple of white dicks who stir up trouble, get along nicely. They stick together and they help each other out, and are a real community. The fact that they’ve got different ethnic backgrounds is no issue at all. You may find it too idyllic, exaggerated and sugar-coated, but I absolutely loved it. Same is true for the choice of bad guys. On the one hand, you have the clichéd asshole boyfriend of his former flame – who, however, is more of a rival and/or a troublemaker, than a full-on villain – and on the other hand, the greedy white business man who forces the (Afro-american; to ensure that the line between good and evil can’t be drawn too neatly into black and white) landlord to neglect his duties in order to make sure that the residents of the building complex move out. Granted, it’s very 80s, very clichéd, and very exaggerated – but in a cheesy kind of way, I loved it.

While we’re at it: There definitely are a lot of scenes that require a huge tolerance level for cheese and/or silliness. For example, we’re not even 10 minutes into the movie, and we already get our first dance-off. The whole movie is anything but subtle, for example in the scene where Dixie is sitting in the studio, heartbroken over John, and of course they’re singing a schmaltzy love song, titled “First love never dies”. The dialogue is similarly edging between hilarious and cringe-worthy at times (“Don’t make me look bad.” “Nothing can make you look bad.”). And, of course, how could I forget the ending, where rap music saves the world… or at least their neighborhood? Not to mention the end credits song where everyone gets his or her own lines to rap along with Rappin’ Hood (Yeah, that’s right, John Hood is called Rappin’ Hood, because he’s rappin’, and his last name is Hood. Also, there’s one scene where he steals from the rich and gives to the poor; I guess with a name like that, that’s pretty much mandatory behavior). However, there’s such an incredibly charming innocence and good-naturedness about the movie, that I actually found those things quite endearing. They meant well, and that definitely counts for something. I also have to say that I found Mario van Peebles – whom so far I’ve only known from his terrible performance in “Jaws: The Revenge” (isn’t it funny how we kinda always come back to that movie? And I wouldn’t be surprised if I’d end up mentioning it again in my upcoming “Mako: The Jaws of Death”-review!) – quite charming in the role. He also has some nice chemistry going on with the uber-sweet Tasia Valenza. And I liked how from time to time, the movie did not go where I expected it to (for example, they make quite a deal out of the fact that Hood needs cash for showing up to make a demo in the studio, so I expected that the producer would screw him over. But instead, he does get the money – but by then, it’s too late.).

Now, obviously, no one in his right mind would actually call “Rappin'” a good film. It’s worst aspect – and given its subject matter, that’s a huge, crucial failing – are the rap songs. Granted, I’m not the biggest fan of this kind of music anyway (call me old-fashioned, but I strongly believe that if you make music you should actually be able to sing, and not just talk), so I’m probably not the best benchmark, but I’d like to believe that even I can tell a good rap song apart from a bad one. And the ones featured here really were mostly rather bad. We’re already off on a bad start with the opening number “Rappin’ Hood”, which was extremely clichéd (“Can you dig it?” No, I can’t, sorry.) and not really catchy. The later songs weren’t much better, with “Snack attack” an especially painful piece. Pretty much the only song that I liked was the one that those kids sang. “Can’t you see, he don’t love you, come to me!”. That was funny. The rest was pretty terrible. The whole movie is also very clichéd, and even though some developments surprised me here and there, the overall story is extremely predictable. The finale in the town hall is also incredibly silly. By that time, you’ll either be ready to go with it, or you’ll throw your hands up in despair, and I totally get anyone who opted for the latter. However, I found the movie far too well-meaning, charming and entertaining to actually call it “terrible”. It’s not good, but if you’re willing to roll with all the cheese and silliness, you can have a decent time with it.

Now, “Rappin'” might not be respected, but it’s not as bad as I expected. So just sit back and rap along, or I’ll continue with this song.
4/10


IMDB

Posted in movie reviews, Project Terrible | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Project Terrible: Manos – The Hands of Fate

Posted on June 3, 2015 by cornholio1980

Manos The Hands of FateManos: The Hands of Fate
USA 1966
Written by Harold P. Warren
Directed by Harold P. Warren
Watched on 31.05.2015

Yep, that was indeed pretty terrible. “Manos: The Hands of Fate” has a 1.9-rating on IMDB, and is currently featured as #14 on their Bottom 100-list. And deservedly so, I might add. It’s definitely one of the very worst movies that I’ve ever seen in my entire life, and to my big disappointment, it isn’t even “so bad it’s good”- or “guilty pleasue”-bad like, say, “Jaws: The Revenge” or “Battlefield Earth”. Those at least have a certain trashy charm, even though no one would ever mistake them for anything else than what they are, which is pretty terrible, catastrophic movies. But at least, they’re not boring. Annoying, mind-boggling, excruciating, inconcievable, stupid, and face-palmingly terrible, perhaps, but not boring. “Manos: The Hands of Fate”, on the other hand, is all that, and on top of it, also extremely dull and tiresome. Thus, I’d rather watch three double features of those two beforementioned movies than to have to suffer through just one more showing of this unbearable drivel.

———————————— SPOILERS ?!?!?!?! ————————————

Now, to be honest, for the first 10-15 minutes or so I had some hope that “Manos: The Hands of Fate” would fall into a similar “bad, but in a good way”-category for me, since I found the level of incompetence that’s on show here from frame one, quite amusing (at least for a little while). The terrible, odd, far too cheerful music; all those scenes with the landscape going by, shot from out of the car (which were probably only there to stretch the running time a little bit), the kinda-funny line of the cop (“If you’re running late, you should have started earlier.”), and, of course, all those portentously shots of people staring at each other, which actually had me laugh out loud. So overall, “Manos: The Hands of Fate” was off to a good start – “good” insofar as I thought that despite it being really bad, it could still be entertaining (albeit unintentionally so). However, once they entered the house, it started to fall apart pretty quickly. While the incompetence remains, somehow all the fun that could he had in the first 10-15 minutes was suddenly gone. Well, ok, the scene with the dog was quite nice, mostly because a) it was sooooo clichéd and b) it missed the mark (of being terrifying or sad) so considerably that it was quite funny.

Unfortunately, after that, there were only a couple of similar unintentionally entertaining scenes (like Torgo’s “He wants you for his wife” – which lost all potentially threatening impact because of the mood-killing music) – the rest was just boring beyond belief, and once The Master awakens, I was ready to call it quits, since I had already had enough of this movie. However, I soldiered on, suffering through that terrible scene with the endlessly bickering wives (where Harold P. Warren’s incompetence again was extremely noticeable, in the way that their voices suddenly stopped whenever the Master was shown; or when you only hear one wife speaking, even though you can see the lips of all of them move), the senseless bitch fight in the grass, that totally unnecessary scene where one of the wives pays Michael a visit, the weird scene where they seem to try to caress Torgo to death with their hands, or the weird-as-fuck and totally incomprehensible ritual, where Torgo should supposedly be sacrificed, and the Master takes his hand, puts it over the fire, and suddenly there’s a cut, and he holds the burning, severed hand, while you can clearly see Torgo run away in the background (far faster, btw., than he walked before all the time, due to his deformed legs). What. The. Fuck?!?!

As expected with a movie like that, the acting (if you can call it that) is pretty terrible all around, as is Harold P. Warren’s totally incompetent direction (there’s this phrase “he couldn’t direct himself out of a box”, and after having seen “Manos: The Hands of Fate”, I could swear that it was coined in his honor). He has no idea how to stage the shots, how to direct his actors, where to put the camera, how and when to cut, how to create suspense (or any kind of mood, for that matter), and so on. Seriously, “Manos: The Hands of Fate” is shot so incompetently, even Ed Wood would blush in shame. I also have to mention the music again, since most of the time, it so totally doesn’t fit the tone of the movie that it’s baffling. Even during later scenes which are supposed to be thrilling, it’s still quite cheerful and far too light. And when Russ Huddleston and Robert Smith Jr. finally try to create some sort of suspenseful music, they fail miserably. Overall, their music is a major part of why “Manos: The Hands of Fate” never ever even remotely works.

Granted, it’s not all bad-bad. The Master’s costume is actually something that has to be seen to be believed. The thought that someone actually thought that that was a good idea is mind-boggling. Also, the scene were the family runs away, only to then decide that it would be better to get back to the house after all, since they’re being followed, and surely no one would think that they’re actually so stupid as to go back, is unintentionally hilarious. Plus, there were actually two things close to the end that I liked. The first is the scene with The Master and his main/first wife, who defies him, which I actually found quite effective. The other is the bleak ending that even though it totally missed its shocking impact with me due to the fact that the entire movie was so terrible that I couldn’t have given less of a fuck about how it ultimately ends, still took some guts to conceive and shoot, so at least for this very little teenie tiny bit, I have to give kudos to Harold P. Warren. However, that doesn’t make the movie any less excruciating.

At least one good thing came out of this rather unfortunate experience, though: I now feel sufficiently “Project Terrible”-deflowered to calmly face the rest of my assignments. I mean, it couldn’t possibly get any worse. RIGHT?!?!
1/10


IMDB

Posted in movie reviews, Project Terrible | Tagged , , , , , | 8 Comments

Announcement: Project Terrible

Posted on June 2, 2015 by cornholio1980

In case you haven’t heard of it before: Project Terrible is an irregular column where a group of sado-masochistically inclined movie bloggers assign each other the most terrible movies imaginable, with the goal of inflicting as much pain as possible. Sounds fun, right?

Originally created by Mondo Bizarro‘s Alec Pridgen and featuring an assortment of more-or-less regular contributors, I was kindly invited to participate in the next round. And I got no one else to blame for that than myself. See, here’s the deal: I recently watched the great Cannon Films-documentary “Electric Boogaloo”, a film that not only stirred some nostalgic feelings (since I’ve grown up with their B-movie action stuff, like “Delta Force”, “American Ninja” and so on) and tempted me to further increase my already impressive DVD- and Blu-Ray-collection, but which also brought a couple of seemingly bad movies to my attention. And one of them, “The Apple”, seemed to be perfect for my buddy Maynard – well, perfect in the sense that I strongly suspected that he’d end up hating every second of it. But how to force him to actually watch it – other than to go all “Clockwork Orange” on him? Well, Project Terrible, of course! Because there, I can assign it to him! In the end, since each of us chose a theme for the movies that we’d watch and review, and “The Apple” didn’t fit with his, I actually had to make a separate deal with him anyway, and we agreed to give each other an additional movie from our own themes (Me: Cannon Films. Maynard: IMDB Bottom 100). Thus, I ended up with “Manos: The Hands of Fate” – and I strongly suspect that I got the worse part of that deal. However, I’m not a quitter, so I’ll now have to endure my very first Project Terrible – and you’re very welcome to share my pain!

Over the next couple of days, you can expect reviews of the following movies from me:
Bolero (assigned by Maynard, that devious bastard)
Hercules (assigned by Bob)
Mako: The Jaws of Death (assigned by Michele)
Rappin’ (assigned by Alec)
Special bonus feature: Manos: The Hands of Fate (assigned by Maynard)

And here’s what awaits the other participants: Alec (Mondo Bizarro; “Monsters & Aliens”):
Beyond
Crimson Force
Grim
Homoti

Maynard (Horror Movie Diary; “IMDB Bottom 100”):
Baby Geniuses
Daniel der Zauberer
Space Mutiny
Superbabies: Baby Geniuses 2
The Apple

Michele (The Girl Who Loves Horror; “Natural Disasters”):
100° Below Zero
2012 Doomsday
Age of Ice
Meteor Apocalypse

Robert (reviews will appear on Mondo Bizarro; “Superheroes”):
Super Capers: The Origins of Ed and the Missing Bullion
Superman: Requiem
Thor: Hammer of the Gods
The Trial of the Incredible Hulk

I very much hope that you’ll find our misery entertaining!

Posted in About this Blog | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Screener-Review: The Unearthing

Posted on June 1, 2015 by cornholio1980

The UnearthingThe Unearthing
USA 2015
Written by Tristan James Jensen
Directed by Tristan James Jensen
Watched on 29.05.2015

Now I don’t know about you, but when I was a teenager, I had mostly three things on my mind: School, going out with friends, and getting laid – and not necessarily in that order. Not so Tristan James Jensen. At the tender age of 16, he already wrote, shot, produced and directed his first feature film. That alone would be impressive. Even better, though: “The Unearthing” is not “just” a promising debut, but a pretty good mystery thriller in its own right.

Of the four functions that he served on his feature film debut, I’d say that Tristan James Jensen the cinematographer probably does the best and most admirable work. Of course, it’s far easier today, with contemporary technology, to shoot a nice looking picture than it was, say, 20 years ago. Still, I was mightily impressed by how great “The Unearthing” looked. Apart from a couple of dialogues at the beginning, who were shot in a slightly monotone manner (the camera shifting all the time to the person who’s talking at the moment, one close-up after another, without noticeable reaction shots or a wide shot to break up the monotony – but that was only noticeable during the first couple of minutes, and got better the more the movie progressed), “The Unearthing” looks pretty stunning for such a no-budget effort. It even comes in anamorphic widescreen! It’s obvious that he had fun staging the shots, playing with the focus, etc. Seriously, you don’t expect a no-budget feature from a newcomer to look even remotely as good.

Tristan James Jensen the director does a nice job, too, even though his inexperience showed here and there. The main issue here is tone. As much as I adored the soundtrack, which taken by itself was really great, it’s a little bit too lighthearted at times, especially considering the darker and/or scarier moments. And even if you don’t take the music into account, the scary scenes didn’t work quite as well as they could have. That’s partly an issue of the (non-existent) budget, but partly also of the (missing) reaction of the protagonists. Now I don’t know about you, but when a woman would suddenly vanish right in front of my eyes, I would freak the fuck out. However, in this scene, and also later in the cave, the protagonists stay surprisingly – and unbelievably – calm. No screams, no (apparent) shock, no nothing. They simply slowly back away and leave. They later discuss how scared they were, how disturbing it all was, but we’re only told, not shown. Anyway, their lack of reaction made it hard for me to really buy into those moments. So that’s something that Tristan James Jensen should look out for in the future: We only believe in something that happens on-screen, if the protagonists seem to believe in it too, and if their reaction is noticeable and authentic. There were also a couple of sound-issues, but those didn’t bother me, since they’re simply due to the no-budget-character of the movie. I’m just mentioning it for the sake of those who want their movies completely flawless and polished, production-wise.

As far as the acting is concerned, the standout here is Angelina Masciopinto, who gives an incredibly effortless performance. She’s a natural, and I hope that the talent that she shows here will result in many more roles in the future. Riley Yeary also gives a good performance, especially considering that this was her first major role, however, in contrast to Angelina Masciopinto, I could see her acting. Her moves, her facial expressions, her gestures, it all felt predetermined, calculated, instead of coming off as natural. That’s mostly due to inexperience, though, and I definitely don’t blame her, since when I was about the same age, I stood on the stage for a school play, and I made the exact same mistake; I thought that I had to act the role instead of simply being the role. So who am I to judge? Anyway, she definitely has the necessary acting chops – now she just needs more experience and/or a more experienced director to steer her in the right direction. As for Kaleb Miller, he falls somewhere in between those two. In the “regular” scenes, he also comes off pretty natural, but when he plays the more dramatic moments (like the bedside admission to Autumn), the fact that he’s acting is a little bit more noticeable. However, given the fact that all three had no (noteworthy) prior acting experience, and worked with a similarly inexperienced director, they all are to be commended for their performances here. I’ve seen far worse acting from far more experienced people in far costlier movies.

Now, as for Tristan James Jensen the writer… what impressed me the most was his restraint when it comes to showing technology. I don’t remember seeing even one cell phone! Thus, he gives “The Unearthing” a timelessness that I wouldn’t have suspected from one of those kids that run around with their smartphones all the time (not that I’m that different, mind you). I was also quite surprised how “romantic” this movie was. There’s not one iota of cynicism to be found here. He also plays it completely straight, not deferring to the modern “Let’s make fun of ourselves” and/or meta-level trends. Thus, “The Unearthing” is surprisingly (and pleasantly) old-fashioned for the debut feature of such a young filmmaker. The story itself, however, was nothing to write home about. I also have to admit that I found the ending to be a little confusing. I had a hard time figuring out what exactly was going on (especially during the “showdown”), and I can’t decide if that was due to the script, to the editing, or if I’m just too damn stupid. I usually like it when movies don’t talk down to their audience, but here, I would have prefered a little more clarity. I also had a hard time with the scene “in between worlds” (you’ll know it when you see it). That’s not an objective criticism at all, but just a matter of taste, since with a few notable exceptions, “spiritual” moments like that just aren’t my thing. Finally, a scene near the end, which harks back to a similar moment at the beginning, suggests a twist that I could have done without. The older I get and the more movies I see, the more and more weary do I get about those kind of last-minute-shocking-twist-endings, and I just think that “The Unearthing” needn’t rely on such a “cheap” trick. However, that again is more about my personal taste than anything else.

Overall, “The Unearthing” shows a lot of promise. It’s not perfect, and there’s some room for improvement, but the talent definitely is there. Now he just needs more experience and a bigger budget (or rather, a budget, period); or, in other words: Someone needs to give this guy a chance. He’s a rough diamond, but with the right support, he could become a great and intriguing new (genre) filmmaker. For now, though, he first and foremost is an interesting new voice that is well worth watching out for.
6/10

Many thanks to the director, producer, writer and cinematographer TJ Jensen himself for my very first screener! 😀


IMDB

Posted in movie reviews, screener | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment