Change Your Image
konandevries
Reviews
Brahms: The Boy II (2020)
Pointless sequel
The original wasn't great either, but it was considerably better than this (at least for the first hour or so).
I have no idea why they made this: the original was hardly something you'd go "Oh yes! We have to get in on this thing, make it a franchise!" over...or who knows, perhaps someone actually did.
It's a generic "possessed doll" movie with nothing even remotely original to it. It's also completely illogical (duh) considered as a sequel: in the original, the doll wasn't actually supernatural/possessed, it was just moved around by a deranged dude who used secret passages and whatnot in his house.
In this very forgettable and absolutely to-be-avoided sequel, the doll (yes, the same doll) turns out to be possessed by some kind of spirit after all. It's unclear whether it is now possessed by the spirit of the deranged dude - or whether it was possessed all along: nobody knows, nobody cares.
The only remotely interesting thing about this movie is that Katie Holmes looks kinda old in it (as in: surprisingly old) - which makes me feel VERY old. I can't very well say that counts in its favor, though.
The Visitor (2022)
The Visitor
The story is so-so, perhaps even okay-ish when compared to much of the other crap out there. Or - if you will - it's generic (which is better than pure crap).
But the acting is so bad that even if the story had been excellent (which it obviously is not, to be clear), the deplorable acting would have undermined it utterly.
It's a general problem with this movie, but the main culprit is the male protagonist. He is just absolutely atrocious. He's bad enough when he's reciting lines, but his nonverbal acting is what truly gives him away (as a...well, terrible actor).
Sorry, but whatever might have been (possibly - unlikely as it is, but still) saved this movie from being pure crap is blown away by the performance of this guy. He's shockingly bad.
The Resurrected (1991)
The Resurrected
I should confess, first and foremost, that I am not a Lovecraft fan. Far from it. I find his work second rate at best. But for some reason I have developed a fascination with movie adaptations of his stories.
Apart from the ones that clearly lean towards comedy treatment (Re-Animator and whatnot), this is my personal favorite Lovecraft adaptation. It has a distinct "made for TV" vibe and is filled with actors who might as well (and probably did) apply their not-too-dazzling skills mainly to daytime soap work. But I like this movie. It has a certain charm. I have actually watched it - full length - twice.
As for the rating, I can't in good faith dish out more than five stars. That is the very maximum, as this is objectively speaking not a very good movie. But it's a movie that may do the trick for a select few.
The Unnamable (1988)
Not horribly bad (actually)
I have been watching a lot of Lovecraft adaptations lately. For some reason. It has much more to do with a fascination for pre-2000 horror movies of the lesser known kind than with any admiration for Lovecraft's literature, I can assure you: I find it quite appropriate that all the adaptations I have watched have been movies in the "B" category (at best). Anyway - this one: it's clearly not a good movie. I mean, very obviously not. But it's not without interest or - indeed - charm.
There are some actors here that have very few appearances elsewhere, which I always find interesting in itself, not least given the fact that at least one them isn't actually that terrible (Mark Kinsey Stephenson). Caveat: I mean he isn't that terrible in this movie (I have only seen him in one other movie, viz. The sequel to this one - a movie it's almost impossible to find anywhere these days, at least not in a half-decent version/resolution).
Right, enough rambling: bottom line, this is barely a B-movie. More like a C-movie. But I still - kinda - like it. It's bad but not...unsympathetic, if that makes sense. No? Probably not. Alright then, let's go with this: among the many Lovecraft adaptations out there, this actually isn't horribly bad (largely because there are numerous efforts that are clearly worse, including ones with much bigger budgets, but also because it does possess a certain je ne sais quoi type of charm.
Witness (1985)
Solid
I watched this one years ago, as a rental movie (on VHS if you can believe that) back when I was in high school or thereabouts. Decided to download and re-watch it recently, and I don't regret that: it's a solid movie.
One minor thing that bothered me was an early scene where Book (Harrison Ford) takes Samuel (Lukas Haas) and his mother (Kelly McGillis) to a bar in order for the kid to (potentially) identify the killer: arguably a bit of a stretch in terms of realism (as is, in fact, the whole sequence where Book pretty much forces the Amish folk to stay at his sister's place, etc.).
On the whole, however, this is a well executed affair with Ford in one of his best roles (I would argue). Crucially, it's a movie that knows when to tone it down a bit where it matters most. The whole romance side plot is evidence of this, but especially the way it ends: it would have been oh-so-easy to just let Book and Rachel end up together in one way or another. But they do not - and the ending is much stronger for it: the final shot, with its «it had to be this way» feel (Book driving past Rachel's more realistic suitor as the former leaves the place), is pretty much perfect.
I would also like to highlight the final shootout: this too is almost oddly (compared to similar scenarios in Hollywood mainstream efforts) toned-down: it's obviously dramatic enough, action packed even, that's not what I mean - but it nevertheless struck me as refreshing: the killer (Danny Glover) is disposed of with a single shotgun discharge after a very short prelude. And the true Big Bad of the movie (Josef Sommer)...well, he actually gives up (as in - he surrenders).
Primal Rage (2018)
Primal Rage
A couple of points:
1) If you want to keep the viewer (at least somewhat) invested in the fate of the protagonists, it's essential to make them (at least somewhat) sympathetic. In this movie there is no story to speak of beyond the protagonists trying to get the hell away from a place, and so there is literally nothing to go on in terms of this (crucial) point. The female lead is slightly more tolerable than the male (helped by the fact that she is a portrayed by a more competent actor), but in terms of creating sympathy (from the viewer), it simply doesn't work at all.
2) When I say «no story» above, I mean «no coherent, intelligently constructed story». There is an attempt to bring in some «folkloristic» elements, but it comes across as involuntarily parodic more than anything. My point? Keep it simple. The presence of the «witch» and the extremely tenuous connection to something vaguely «Native-American» are additions to the plot that do not enhance it at all. The movie is needlessly long at 106 minutes. Editing out much, if not all, of the half-assed «nature strikes back» background story would have improved it.
Positives (such at it is): I agree 100% with those who say that no CGI is a plus here. It generally is in modern B-movies. And the creatures (apart from the «witch»*) are not badly done, I absolutely do not agree with those who say they are: I don't know what they base that on (compared to what, exactly?). Granted, it sometimes looks like a dude in a gorilla suit - but a) that kinda goes with the territory and b) it's more to do with the actor's movements than the quality of the costume itself.
I have seen several Bigfoot movies lately. This is not the worst of them. But - damn - that says a lot more about the genre than about the quality of this particular effort.
* This is an artistic choice, though - a very odd one, for me, but still: they clearly could have portrayed the character with more realistic make-up if they had wanted to. In fact, I'm not sure what the idea was here: an actual supernatural creature - or someone, bizarrely, wearing a Halloween mask.
Along Came a Spider (2001)
All about Morgan Freeman
I would not say that this movie is riddled with huge, actual plot holes (as some seem to think): it's more a question of a somewhat sketchy plot being stretched far too thin by the twist at the end. It's one of those «doesn't really stand up to scrutiny» things, though, rather than a deal breaker in terms of - let's say - watchability. Because the movie is certainly watchable: it moves along nicely, if unspectacularly, and is - on the whole - not terrible for what it is: a weaker effort than Kiss The Girls, but roughly in that same ballpark. Like the earlier movie, this one too is pretty much a vehicle for Morgan Freeman (it really is all about his portrayal of the Cross character). And - as such - it works after a fashion.
The Covenant (2017)
The Covenant
There are two main problems with this movie:
1) The writing. The story is a shambolic mix of generic horror plot elements. If you asked a not too intelligent AI bot to construct a plot for a horror movie, this is what it might have come up with. Now, given that I assume (perhaps incorrectly, who can tell) that this mess was not written by a bot...well, what can you say? It doesn't speak well for the writers, does it? Absolutely terrible job, sorry. Even if it had been done as a spoof, it would have been bad (and it's not a spoof, even though it looks like at it at times).
2) The acting. With hardly an exception, the acting performances are extremely flat at best - and downright embarrassing at worst. There isn't a single character of importance who isn't portrayed in an utterly unconvincing manner.
Conclusion: any rating over 5 stars must have been submitted by someone who was either drunk or a shill of some kind. There is no reason why you should waste your time on this movie, it has no upsides of any kind that I can think of.
Orphan: First Kill (2022)
Pointless
"Four years is a lot in the development of a child". Yeah - sure it is. But think about it - that premise is what this unnecessary and extremely underwhelming sequel is based on in terms of...well, the PLOT (which is kinda important).
In the original movie "Esther" was adopted by a family who had never seen her before - which works plot wise. This time around, "Esther" googles some missing kids and picks one who kinda looks like her - kinda, yeah - and sure enough, the family accepts her. Sure, there are some doubts - more and more as she (obviously) starts acting more and more creepily - but come on: the basic premise is utterly laughable. A mother wouldn't mistake a 30 year old maniac with some kind of growth disorder for her missing daughter. Period. And with that - the plot's gone.
The fact that Isabelle Fuhrman looks much older (duh) in this one compared to the original doesn't help either.
Pointless sequel to a decent (but hardly great) original.
Malignant (2021)
Enjoyable
The people who give this movie a 10/10 rating must belong to one of the following categories:
A) They are far too easily impressed - to the point where one suspects that they have never seen anything half competent before, and are thus completely blown away by something that should have produced nothing more than a slight nod of approval.
B) They are purposely overrating a movie that CLEARLY doesn't deserve a 10/10 rating as a countermeasure to what they perceive as too many undeservedly harsh reviews. This is a very unfortunate practice (let's be clear on that).
C) They simply do not understand how this kind of rating system works. I mean, that has to be the conclusion when reviewers state explicitly that the movie has several weaknesses (including fundamental ones, such as the quality of the acting) - but nevertheless give it ten stars out of ten.
Alright - rant over. The movie is not bad at all - quite enjoyable, actually. And those who point out that it - obviously - doesn't take itself too seriously...are quite right (and many of the harsher reviews really seem to miss the point quite a bit).
However, to me a movie that isn't bad at all/okay/enjoyable/a bit of fun on a dull evening (in short: what this movie IS)...well, that's a 7/10 at the very most. In this case, it's a 6/10 - and that is NOT a poor rating. If you think it is, then you haven't understood how this thing works.
Uncharted (2022)
Mostly enjoyable (if you're a fan)
By now movies based on video games constitute a genre of sorts, I suppose - and the ones I have watched myself have been less than mediocre at best (Tomb Raider) and shockingly bad at worst (Hitman). This is one is surprisingly good - by which I mean, let's say, a notch above mediocre. In short, it's a standard adventure/action flick with mostly decent efforts from the main actors (I like Mark Wahlberg, I must admit - he isn't a great actor, but as long as he sticks to what he knows, he's alright) and a fair-ish story with okay pacing. However, there are LOTS of details here (camera angles, not least) which will seem very odd and potentially plain silly to someone who isn't familiar with the Uncharted series of video games. But for someone who IS familiar with the games, this is fairly enjoyable: in fact, the blatantly game like sequences are kinda cute, and they work better than the half-assed attempts in the Tomb Raider movies, to make an obvious comparison. All in all, this is a movie that's completely unnecessary (nobody really needed an Uncharted movie), but as far as pointless movies go...it ain't half bad. I will not watch it again - but I don't regret spending a couple of hours on it either.
Catwoman: Hunted (2022)
Sorry - but this really is horrible
I'm sure there are fans out there who think Batwoman is a great character. I don't know who you are - and I don't understand what the hell you're seeing in her - but whatever: congrats, it really looks like she ain't going away. That said, the fact that Batwoman is in this movie (in a huge role at that) is not the reason it sucks. It just does (suck, that is). The story is so thin that if it were butter, you couldn't use it to cover a tiny cracker. And here it's spread over a full slice of bread. So - yeah. Or - no. Also - if you can't make a damn nose look half decent (and consistent), you shouldn't release animations. The artwork on this one is miserable - generic at best, downright incompetent at worst. Lastly, the voice acting does very little to save this train wreck - from the mildly annoying Catwoman (would have been slightly tolerable for a 20 minute episode - gets on your nerves after half an hour) to the absolutely ridiculous Batwoman ("I'm Batwoman. I do everything Batman does, I have no personality beyond being a lesbian: that IS a personality - right? I like to use his...I mean MY utility belt. And I have a stupidly deep voice - because...I'm a lesbian...I guess")...oh, just...forget it. This movie is crap - watch something else.
Amulet (2020)
Too clever by half
A competent writer probably could have turned this basic idea into a half decent horror story. As it stands, however, it simply isn't well enough crafted - not as a story, not as a movie. The fact that it's rather blandly (not poorly - just kinda meh) acted out doesn't help either. The protagonist is so briefly and so clumsily painted as an actual bad guy (whoever thought it was clever to barely touch on the act of transgression itself simply screwed up here ) that he makes little sense as - well - what he ends up as: someone tormented by two supernatural beings that come across as plain cartoonish (the smoking nun - oh gimme a break) and inexplicably vengeful (the other one). Yeah, we get it - the protagonist gets what's coming to him for having raped a woman. But the deliberately sympathetic portrayal of the guy doesn't work at all - it just comes across as incongruous. You need to be pretty subtle to pull something like this off - and what we have here is about as subtle as a...smoking nun, I guess?
King Kong (2005)
Much more dated than the original
I remember watching this movie back when it was first released - on a huge screen in a big, crowded theater. I was somewhat impressed back then. I thought it had something to offer - as a remake of a genuine, undoubted classic. Now - close to two decades later - not so much. The CGI effects - state of the art back then - look dated now. And with that - well, the whole thing sort of becomes pointless. Because the movie has absolutely nothing on the original in terms of...anything. It's a great adventure story (of its kind) - but adds nothing to the original in that respect. The acting is on the whole decent - but certainly nothing special. It's competent as a work of cinematography - but, again, nothing special in that respect either. The inescapable conclusion - for me - is that compared to the original this is just...bland and a bit pointless. King Kong (1933) is a timeless classic - a movie everyone should check out for all sorts of reasons. The only reason to check out King Kong (2005) is to compare it to the original - and to the 1976 remake (which is actually more interesting than this one in some ways) - and conclude (I would hope) that CGI and sheer cosmetics are of very little value ultimately.
The Curse of Lilith Ratchet (2018)
Uncommonly bad acting
I watch a lot of B-movies (well, this one is more of a C-movie, but you get the idea) in the horror genre (I have a thing for 'em), so I hardly expect top notch acting when I check out a title like this one.
But really - the acting is so bad it's almost impossible to watch this. And, to be clear, it's never "so bad it's funny" either - it's just extremely flat and amateurish.
Napoleon Dynamite (2012)
Not bad, could have been better
This animated series is much less subtle than the movie, the humor is more streamlined (standard animated comedy material) and, on the whole, the main characters gain nothing from being expanded upon in new story lines. Kip is arguably the character that works best here - with Deb on the other end of the spectrum: the animated Deb is just bland (a lovesick "I want him but he doesn't notice me" stereotype that doesn't do the charmingly oddball movie version justice at all), and gets far too much airtime. Grandma is alright (pretty standard - you've seen her character a million times before, but it's well enough done and she works nicely in tandem with Kip), as is Napoleon himself. Rico is okay too (but like all the other main characters, he suffers from being "standardized").
All in all, though, this is well worth watching for anyone who liked the movie.