Reviews

When I saw this, I laughed so hard I thought I'd die from suffocation. Every detail in this movie is such a perfect ridicule of bad sci-fi. It pokes fun at such cult classics as Phil Tucker's Robot Monster, It Came from Outer Space, and Ed Wood's Orgy of the Dead. It is purposefully bad acted in such a way that perfectly matches the style of all these movies. I can't recommend it more highly to anyone with a sense of humor who has ever seen a bad 50s sci-fi movie. The characters are such perfect stereotypes of the type of characters that you see in these movies. There's a scientist who is a meteographer, (not a meteorologist) someone who studies meteors in the hopes of advancing the field of science. Any details about actual science are predictably missing. There's the loving wife of the scientist, who bears the heavy burden of being "the wife of a scientist". There's the evil scientist, who never actually does any science, just evil. The aliens are possibly the best part of the film. They are so perfect in their facial expressions, and their lack of understanding of human cultures, despite coming from a culture very similar to ours. The mutant is also typical because it has a lust for killing AND human women despite its "grotesque" appearance. Animala, four woodland creatures transmutified into a person, perfectly embodies the struggle of animals trying to live in a human society, and it turns out there really isn't too much of a struggle. Rounding off the perfect cast, is the lost skeleton whose character is lacking so many details it makes such a wonderful villain. This movie is a perfect 10, A+ and if you've read this far and don't want to see it, then you clearly haven't never seen any bad sci-fi, and you are missing out on some of the biggest turkeys than American cinema has produced.

For starters, this movie made no sense from the beginning to end. That was the best part. I couldn't stop laughing throughout the entire movie. I got shushed so many times, but I could not help it! I think the plot has so many holes, there's almost nothing there. David Goyer completely breaks and redefines all rules about vampires at all times. But that is the best part! It makes the movie so humorous! Just watch Blade's glasses. They are indestructible and they don't fall off! That is pure comedic genius. Okay, so I found this move hilarious. It isn't supposed to be a comedy but it is. How about the action? I'm not too big of an action movie fan, but I am a ninja movie fan, and this movie has the best of both worlds. Not only does it have action, kung-fu fighting, but they added professional wrestling to the mix also. The excitement never stops, so most people can look past the terrible story. (But you miss out on the humor!) Plus, the action scenes are breathtaking. They seamlessly put CG in to do amazing visual effects for stunts and camera work that could never be done in the real life. If you want 2 hours of pure escapist fun, then see this movie right away! It has everything! Action, excitement, ninjas, sci-fi, horror, disgusting amounts of gore, lots of comedy, (but unintentional) romance AND drama! (Although the romance and the drama are just plain awful, but that adds to the comedy!)

First of all, most people who praise this film did NOT read the books. The books are amazing but cannot work as film. Maybe that is why no one has undertaken this epic until now. What I can't understand was how people can praise all the different aspects of it. The costuming and sets were the only thing decent. My complaints? Too many liberties were taken with the book. Now, I'm not referring to the plot elements (which were more or less intact except for Tom Bombadil. If you don't know who that is, read the book!) but the style that Tolkien worked so hard to preserve in all of his books. The first item that was ruined in the first 5 minutes was the mystery of Sauron. Sauron is such an amazing character because you never get more than very small glimses of him. Tolkien keeps this throughout all the books. Jackson ruined that in 5 minutes. Next, the action always follows the hobbits. This put you in the place of the hobbits. What characters would be better for an audience to identify with? They were as much outsiders to this strange world as we are. Unfortunately, Jackson ruined that also.

The directing was nothing spectacular. It was unobtrusive, but there was no style really, so it did not add any more depth to the movie. The acting was pretty good, but it could not save the movie from the unforgivable sins that the movie committed to the book.

The special effects, though praised, were not good at all. You'd think since they have to do 3 films with hobbits that they would come up with a good way to do them and stick to it. Not the case! The hobbits change size drastically throughout the film depending on the technique that is being used to reduce them. Sometimes they are children, but the worst is when they just put them further from the camera. How is that supposed to work? Although we do not have depth perception in the theater, the audience can still tell when the size difference is only created by the perspective. The CG effects were not outstanding, but after seeing Star Wars: Episode 1, it was nice to know costumes can still be used well.

Now, if I had not read the book, would I have a better view of this film? You bet, but too many things from the book were ruined to make it more of a conventional movie. Even still, I definitely would not think it is worthy of being ranked so high on IMDB.com.

I was lucky to see this film at the Montreal Film Festival, and it was AMAZING. It was definitely violent and confusing (I think I would have gotten more out of it if I understood Spanish), but it was very creative. The cinematography and imagery were amazing. The movie has a very powerful point about loneliness and longing. It is almost entirely silent. Instead of focusing on action and interaction, this movie realistically shows the awkward silences in between conversation, and what we do when we are alone. It is similar to a David Lynch film, and the non-linear story telling reminds me a bit of "Mulholland Drive". I can't pretend I get the full message of what this movie was trying to say, but I still think it was an amazing film, and the best I saw when I was at the Film Festival.