Reviews

Question: What do you get when you mix elements of Aliens with Terminator 2; substitute schlocky director Bruno Mattei for talented director James Cameron; eliminate any charismatic actors like Arnold Schwarzenegger, Sigourney Weaver and Linda Hamilton and replace them with unknown, no-talents; and do it all on a budget? Why you get Shocking Dark of course!

You can call it Terminator II and Bruno can call himself Vincent Dawn, but a turd by any other name will still smell bad. The only redeeming features of the movie are that the creature suits are somewhat amusing and there are some howlingly amusing moments of bad lines and bad line readings to accompany them.

Great film to watch while drinking, otherwise it's a chore.

Taking elements of HP Lovecraft and Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea, and mixing in a tired plot twist from Leviathan, Gods of the Deep tries hard to thrill, but seldom succeeds.

While I enjoy practical effects, and the creature looks good, it isn't effective in its movements and interaction with the submersible. Acting is pretty good, but the script suffers from stereotypical characters who behave in the most incredibly stupid and unbelievable ways. Who fires a machine gun in a sub? And who smokes cigarettes when the oxygen on the sub is running low? This is ridiculous behavior that takes you out of the story. The constantly droning musical score really gets on the nerves after a while.

Not the worst film of its kind that I've seen, and a few fun moments, but overall not great.

Pretty good reworking of the Lovecraft tale that was used as the basis for the far better film From Beyond made in 1986. I've read a novel by Nick Cutter, who was the writer/adapter of this screenplay, and enjoyed it enough to give this film a chance.

The acting from the entire cast is decent, and it is nice to see a lot of practical effects used in lieu of CGI. While the final third is exciting, it leaves too many unanswered questions, although it does have a nasty final sting for the viewer.

I'd say it's worth 90 minutes of your time if you don't mind a slow buildup to the third act. I was never bored with it.

I've waited years to write a review of this train wreck meets a dumpster fire of a film and, having just rewatched it for the 6th or 7th time, I'm finally ready.

There is so much glorious awfulness in this film it's difficult to know where to start. Elizabeth Berkley is way out of her depth playing the lead. She seems to be trying really hard, but just doesn't have the necessary acting chops to pull it off. She is playing it straight but doesn't realize it needed to be performed with an excess of arch campiness. Gina Gershon, who is way better than this material, said in an interview that when she finally realized that the film couldn't be taken seriously (apparently the director didn't convey that too well - more on him later), she got on board and provided the over-the-top archness required, somewhere around Joan Collins level. Kyle Maclachlan looks simply embarrassed by the whole affair; more power to him. The other actors are saddled with paper thin, one note, underwritten characters and deliver appropriate performances for them.

Writer Joe Eszterhas has turned out a script that seems to have been written by a 15 year-old, brain damaged and oversexed boy who is still a virgin. His dialog is ridiculous in the extreme, as if he had no idea how real people might speak to, or behave around, each other. It's an almost surreal experience to hear some of the tone-deaf exchanges in the movie. Joe apparently learned nothing between penning Flashdance and this film. At least Flashdance had some good music in it; this flick just has mortifying, forgettable dance numbers.

Director Paul Verhoeven, who directed some of my favorite films including RoboCop and Total Recall, bungles this film most delightfully. He seems more interested in nipples, and insuring the female cast members show them at all times, than in getting a decent performance from anyone. Those nipples get ice, champagne, sequins and lipstick on them. They are ready to go out and partay! Maybe if Paul could have gotten all the actors on the same page with their performances by explaining the satirical tone of the movie (if indeed that really was the aim of the script - I have my doubts), this might have been a way funnier, though not as deliciously inept and awful, cinematic exercise.

So why can't I go more than a few years without watching it again and again?

What a shame that this show, which started so strong in its first 4 seasons, should have devolved to this sappy and uninteresting mess by the end of season 7. The mystery in this episode came off as an afterthought by the writers who seem to be writing for a soap opera rather than a murder mystery.

Most of the run time was taken up with Geordie's marriage woes, the Vicar's relationship problems, and Mrs. C's health issues. In between this, they shoehorned in a bland and uninvolving pseudo-mystery plot of no consequence, though it did allow for loads of heart-tugging scenes of seniors trying to find joy in the winter of their years.

I've stuck with the series as it went downhill over the last 2 1/2 seasons but this was the end for me. I won't even be watching the finale.

The movie is a cute romcom, nothing more or less. But unlike many others of its genre, it actually has some funny moments along with the tender ones. Charlie Day and Jenny Slate have chemistry together and Scott Eastwood and Gina Rodriguez score laughs as the supporting players. The final scene is a groaner, but I enjoyed the rest of the film.

While some of the reviews here are raves for this film, I am firmly in the opposite camp. I find comedy duos like Laurel and Hardy and Abbott and Costello very funny even today, but Olsen and Johnson are not. Their shtick may have played better in the 40s, however, I don't think it works in this movie at all. Part of the problem is that the paper thin plot seems to take a back seat to far too many musical and comedy interludes. The songs aren't memorable and neither are the slapstick bits. I found the duo's antics insufferable and I didn't care who the killer was by the end.

As a Universal genre completist, I'm glad I finally got to view this little seen film, but I would never put myself through watching it again. Stick with the far better Hold That Ghost from Abbott and Costello, or Ghost Breakers with Bob Hope. 2 1/2 stars.

Mid-budget film that, while it may not deliver any jolts or scares, still manages to be fairly enjoyable. The cast does well with their roles, though the script could have been better and given the viewers more insight into the characters and their motivations. There were some dangling story threads also, and the Exorcist-like ending felt a bit of a letdown. I enjoyed the practical creature effects, and at 91 minutes, the movie never feels draggy or slow. Go in with the expectation that you're going to get some superficial fun involving demonic goings on and you should find it an amiable way to kill an hour and a half.

American Oz tells the story of L. Frank Baum with a heavy emphasis on his one book The Wonderful Wizard of Oz. Like many recent documentaries, it wastes far too much time viewing its subject through today's socio-political lens, while omitting many details of the man's life that are far more interesting and could just stand on their own without trying to make them conform to the way we see things today and reading much into each aspect of the novel that may or may not have been intended by Baum.

No mention is made of Baum's growing disenchantment with the Oz series and his attempts to end it and move on to other characters and books such as the exceptional Life and Adventures of Santa Claus and The Sea Fairies, among others; and zero mention is made of Ruth Plumly Thompson picking up where Baum left off with the Oz series. How about a nod to John R. Neill who illustrated many of the books in the series after W. W. Denslow?

Numerous clips from The 1939 Wizard of Oz are interspersed throughout, which may appeal to the most casual viewer, but have little to do with the author who had been dead for 2 decades by the time the movie was released. More time could also have been spent detailing his many moves and the effect it had on his family.

Aside from these quibbles, they do cover a good deal of his life but there is nothing new here except for those who know nothing of the man and simply are tuning in because they are fans of the 1939 filmed version of his novel.

Perfectly acceptable throwback of a picture with more traditional Universal inspired monsters. The film has a good script, good acting for the most part, and does wonders in the set design, makeup and gore effects for a low budget feature.

Damien Leone shows he's capable as a director, though the film could have benefitted from some tighter editing. It's too long at almost 2 hours, and could have been a topnotch, better paced movie at 90 minutes. Also, with the budget restraints we don't get enough wide shots, which gives the film a bit of a claustrophobic feel. Still, I'm going to check out the director's other films.

If Woody Allen had tackled the classic vampire theme, just past his prime, it might have played out something like this. The script has some sharp dialog and witty word play which is done justice by some good actors who know how to have fun with their lines while still playing it straight for the most part. The film wisely chooses to keep broad comedy at a minimum while loading on the 1930s atmosphere. Not a classic but quite enjoyable for what it is. If you liked Love At First Bite you should find this entertaining.

While it is clear that The Spierig Brothers are familiar with all the haunted house horror story conventions, they, like Rob Zombie before them, do not seem to be able to effectively use them. A fondness for the genre does not translate into the ability to engage and frighten an audience.

Before anyone dismisses my review as being from someone who doesn't enjoy deliberately paced, creepy stories without a plethora of pyrotechnics, let me state that The Haunting (the original not the crappy remake) and 1944's The Uninvited are two of my favorite films. You don't need a large budget or special effects to make a scary film on the subject of a haunted house. Both Insidious and Sinister demonstrated that with good direction and a decent story you can scare the hell out of an audience.

While Winchester boasts some good actors and a wonderful setting that is fraught with possibilities, it squanders both on a tired story of ghosts looking for revenge, which completely ignores the real facts of the Winchester House. A couple jump scares accompanied by sudden music stings work to a degree, but there is no genuine feeling of suspense generated by the script, no growing sense of escalating dread. Instead we get acceptable performances and some nice looking sets as the actors go through their paces to little effect.

It's not a terrible film, but one which fails to raise the hackles and which you will quickly forget after leaving the theater.

This was the most moving and magical animated feature I have seen in years. I've seen all the Disney/Pixar/Dreamworks etc. CGI films and feel that this stands head and shoulders above their recent releases.

Using stop motion animation and some CGI, Kubo creates a world that is at once real and fantastic. It has a solid feel to its wondrous and imaginative landscapes that 100% CGI movies still can't quite capture. The story is heartfelt and told without pandering to small children, yet they will still be able to enjoy it, unless their senses have become too deadened by the hyperactive antics found in so many of today's animated films geared toward them. The filmmakers don't soften some of the scary images and situations as we often see in today's PC productions that seem to believe that small kids will be traumatized by a frightening moment in a film.

This is a film that the whole family can enjoy.

This is a tense and exciting little film. I was surprised how quickly and effectively the movie manages to ratchet up the tension without wasting time on endless setup, giving us just enough to know the characters and get involved with the situation. There is a very effective and ominous tone struck with the opening frames and nicely developed as the cast heads to an island that is cut off from help. Good performances and cinematography help greatly; for once we have a juvenile who is not annoying and smart leads in Fay Wray and Jack Holt. Dorothy Burgess does a good job with a complicated part. This plays like a forerunner to Val Lewton's classic I Walked with a Zombie, though there are no zombies present here. Worth catching the beautiful print on TCM.