Reviews

54 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
As dull as his sister's movie
5 July 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Again I say, Universal did not know how to make a great Dracula movie.

It's up for speculation as to if Lon Chaney Jr is playing the original Dracula or his son, and it really doesn't matter. What matters is.....ok, yeah he's very miscast. He was a great actor, but a Transylvanian Count, he was not. The film itself is rather hokey, yet manages to give some clever ideas. Dracula coming to America because he's drained his homeland dry is very dark. Sure, it's why he went to England before, but they never came out and said that. Dracula using his name backwards as an alias. Ok, yeah, it's stupid, but I love it. I love anytime a Dracula movie uses Alucard. Kay actually willingly becoming a vampire so she can obtain eternal life is yet another good idea. And to the film's credit, this was the first time we saw Dracula show a savage brute side, which wouldn't be done again until Christopher Lee put on the cape. But, despite those good qualities, the film suffers from a slow pace(typical of Universal Dracula movies), and heavily padded bits that could have been trimmed for other stuff(all the numerous investigations, the jail scene, scenes at Brewster's home). Not to mention, the film has no real ending. It just kinda stops. No closure.

The rest of the cast is pretty meh. Louise Allbritton is good, but she's really the only memorable one in the film. Evelyn Ankers is on hand, but I've no idea why. They certainly don't give her anything to do despite her having talent and being a popular scream queen. She's just......there

Yeah, this is pretty much for film buffs only. This one is very meh

-- Wes Wall.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
A rather dull bite
5 July 2023
Warning: Spoilers
I know this film is generally regarded as a good sequel. But my question is, how? This movie is sloppy. Very sloppy. It manages good bits. The lack of Dracula himself isn't even the problem. Not in the slightest. Gloria Holden is great as Zaleska. Perfectly eerie yet charming. And all the scenes with Nan Grey are so beautifully tragic. This movie had real talent put into it. Just not in all the right places. The two biggest issues lie in the lead characters, and the nonsensical plot.

Van Helsing(now called Von Helsing for some reason, I dunno) is arrested for the deaths of Dracula and Renfield, which begs the question, why were two officers randomly at Carfax? It was Dracula's property, so they couldn't just patrol there. Did they hear Renfield's screams? If so, why did it take them so long to investigate, and why didn't they run into Harker and Mina?

So, Van Helsing decides to get a skeptical psychiatrist to defend him. Yeah, not a lawyer. A psychiatrist. Cause, that will help him. And by the way, where are Dr. Seward? Harker? Mina? The sanitarium staff? Multiple people that can back up his claims far better than someone skeptical about the whole thing who wasn't even present in the first film to begin with! And they would help him. After everything he did to help them? They literally owe him their lives at this point. But no. No mention. Seward's sanitarium isn't even consulted despite one of the supposed victims having been a patient there!

Then we have our leads, played by Otto Kruger and Marguerite Churchill. Good god, they are insufferable. Kruger is a grouchy jerk to everyone, Churchill is a spoiled brat to everyone, and we're supposed to find them charming. I was honestly all for the Countess getting them both.

It was cool seeing the Transylvania setting again, and Castle Dracula reused is a wonderful bit of continuity. This movie does deliver when it really wants to. I could have used more info on Sandor than they gave us at the end. He was quite an interesting character

Look, it's like I always say. Universal did not know how to make a great Dracula movie.

-- Wes Wall.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Drácula (1931)
7/10
The rumors are true
5 July 2023
Yeah, this is better than the Lugosi version. It has a much better setup, more meaningful dialogue, better visuals, a much creepier Demeter sequence, and for the most part, better acting. Even the wolf howls are creepier.

These things help the film overcome the same sluggish pace that really hurt the Lugosi version. Most of the acting is superior aside from Carlos Villarias ad the man playing Van Helsing. Yeah, even Pablo Alvarez Rubio manages to out crazy Dwight Frye's Renfield, which is insane. Villarias is kind of a dorky looking Dracula, which at first works against him. But it ends up having him come across very socially awkward, which kinds helps sell him being able to fool people. Bela was polite, but had a sinister quality to him. Sometimes you wonder how the characters fall for his act. But Villarias is so hilariously awkward(unintentionally of course), it makes it easy to see the characters just seeing him as an eccentric. Don't get me wrong, Bela is better. I just love how this played out. And his confrontation scene with Van Helsing(which was among the best exchanges in the Lugosi movie), was even better than Lugosi and Van Sloan's, with Dracula actually far more threatening. And I have to mention Lupita Tovar, who outclasses Helen Chandler in virtually every way. She's a fantastic actress, really selling her performance, and wow, what a beauty! Loved her!

Yeah, this version is the superior version people say it is. Give it a real chance

-- Wes Wall.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Dracula (1931)
5/10
Introducing Bela
5 July 2023
At the risk of getting hated by fellow horror fans, I honestly have always found this movie lacking in quality. And while others blame it on the transition from silent to sound, I must point out that Frankenstein was made the same year, and was a much better movie. The sequels to this movie fared worse, which only tells me that Universal did not know how to make a great Dracula movie. But before I get lynched, we'll talk about the positives. Bela Lugosi of course is great here. He's the iconic Dracula literally everyone knows without realizing it. Personally, my favorite role of his is Ygor from the Frankenstein movies, but it's easy to see why Dracula is such a favorite. Likewise, Dwight Frye is great, and so full of mad energy as Renfield. And Edward Van Sloan adds a nice touch of intelligence to the movie as Van Helsing. The rest of the acting is unfortunately rather bland, with David Manners and Helen Chandler especially feeling like they're just reciting their lines, not really acting them. Well, ok. The guy playing Martin is an absolute delight. And Michael Visaroff is great as the innkeeper at the beginning

That's where the movie gets most of its greatness from. Thos first thirty minutes are so nicely done, with such classic moments. But once the film shifts to England, it grinds to a halt, and moves at such a slow pace, it becomes tedious staying awake, which you don't want to admit of such an important movie, but it's true.

The confrontation between Dracula and Van Helsing near the end is a wonderful exception though, and reminds you that these writers weren't incompetent. The film has many moments of greatness. But with so much slowness in between, it's difficult to fully appreciate them when they happen

-- Wes Wall.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Nosferatu (1922)
10/10
An absolute classic
5 July 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Let's face it. Most of us young folks were first exposed to this by SpongeBob of all things. For me it was that, and the short film Boo. But those comedic uses of this movie do not take away the horror aspects of this classic. Max Schreck to this day is a horrifically hideous vampire, and plays the part exceptionally well, with stiff movements, and a creepy stare. He sells the real of Dracula(Orlock) with perfection. Alexander Granach is also memorable giving an insane portrayal of Renfield. John Gottowt, plays a Van Helsing that does surprisingly next to nothing to combat the vampire problem. Not so fun fact, Gottowt would sadly be assassinated by Nazis during World War 2. RIP

The film had a decent pace that keeps you invested, and the scenes aboard the Demeter are handled with nice eerieness(easily the scariest part of the novel, and among the best adaptations of the ill-fated voyage). Dracula being a plague spreader is a unique twist that works well for the film. And of course we have to give this movie credit for originating the lore of vampires being killed by sunlight

It's still a fun film today, with plenty of memorably creepy imagery. Thank goodness Stoker's widow failed to destroy all copies of this gem. Imagine if we only had still images to go by

-- Wes Wall.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Good follow up to a great show
26 April 2023
Warning: Spoilers
There's no denying the importance of Tiga and what a good show it was, and this movie serves as a good follow up taking place two years after the series ended. The film is a bit darker than the show had been, and the villains are sadistic as hell. Kamilla and her backstory are fascinating, and probably helped set the stage for future and better evil Ultras like Belial. We also learn more about Tiga's past, which proves to be very deep. I feel the film could have done more with it, like show us a flashback of Tiga's past evil deeds, but the story we get serves it enough. It's great seeing the whole cast back, and the Dyna cameos are a nice treat.

Overall, good Ultra flick with some great lore. Just maybe could have used more

-- Wes Wall.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Not quite on par with the first, but still a lot of fun
26 April 2023
Warning: Spoilers
If you didn't enjoy the first Zearth, well you probably won't be happy here either. Zearth returns to fight a mysterious dark Ultra, who is working under another Alien Benzene(this one the wife of the one in the first movie). Like the first film, cameos aplenty from previous Ultra stars, but with teven more including Koji Moritsugu(Dan Moroboshi/UltraSeven), and Jiro Dan(Goh Otori/Ultraman Jack). There's also multiple hints that Moritsugu's character might secretly be Dan Moroboshi, though it's never stated for certain. Though it makes since in the timeline with the events of the first Mebius movie. This movie, while still a comedy, takes itself slightly more seriously with the plot centering on Zearth no longer believing in himself and having to find his inner strength through some combat training he can't quite conquer.....yeah, it's basically a long episode of Ultraman Leo. The plot may not be original, but the laughs are plenty, the movie moves at a nice pace, and Kanegon is even here! Who doesn't love Kanegon?

As for which version, definitely pick up the Japanese version. The plot makes a lot more sense, and there's more references to previous Ultra lore(such as Ultraman's original fight with Zetton, and a humorous reference to Seven's Capsule Monsters). But, I do recommend seeing the hilarious English Dub at least once, if just to see UltraSeven claim to be terrified of Pauly Shore movies

-- Wes Wall.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Dirt bad!
26 April 2023
Warning: Spoilers
This isn't your typical Ultraman movie. The plot is bonkers, the hero is inept, the attack team are mostly dimwitted bullies(including the captain), the villain is an oddball, this entire movie is wacky as hell. But, it's supposed to be. It's a parody of other Ultra shows, and it's a fun one. Zearth is something of a germaphobe, which is found out by Alien Benzen, who plots to use it to his advantage in his plot to absorb the Earth's gold, with the help of his personal Kaiju, Cotton-Poppe. Yeah, this is absolute absurdity. But again, it's supposed to be, this film is a comedy. And I had fun. The Ultra series has always been good at laughing at itself, and took a swing at a film Ultra comedy. It's a good film. It's funny. It's short. It's easy to follow. It's a good watch for a rainy afternoon.

And keep an eye out for the cameos by all members of the Science Patrol from the original Ultraman show!

-- Wes Wall.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
What happened?
14 April 2023
Sigh........You know, I legitimately love this series. The stupidity, the humor, Warwick Davis, everything. It's easily one of my favorite horror series despite not being scary in the slightest. But, they dropped the ball here. The positive? Well, Warwick obviously, a delight as always. Like the previous film, the acting is a significant improvement over the first four. The kills are pretty memorable, with some decent gore, and you know what? I dig the Lep's new outfit. And the humor is certainly still on point. I always crack up at Leprechaun trying to get lucky on the phone with Watson's girlfriend. All this at least makes it watchable. But, the film itself is absolutely beyond lazy. One thing I love about the series is how unique the setting of each movie is. In 1, we have a rural farm setting. In 2, we have an in town setting plus lots of action in Lep's lair. In 3, Vegas. 4 blasted into space. 5 went to the hood. And this one, well it stays in the hood. The originality is gone. Returns remedies this by going back to the farm, but turning it into a college sorority setting, bringing the unique setting back. But this one? Ugh. You know, Warwick wanted to do a Western Leprechaun movie. I want that. The original director wanted to do an island Leprechaun movie. Sure! Why not? How about a pirate movie? A medieval Leprechaun movie similar to the lore this one tries to give us but we don't get much of? A 1940s film noir Lep flick? The possibilities are endless. Sadly, this is what we got. A half decent second hood outing. And it hurts more knowing this was Warwick's swan song for the character, which is such a disappointment. As of 2023, he's yet to return to the character. Hopefully at some point we get a true final flick with him. Hell, I'd actually love to see a Leprechaun TV series similar to what Chucky has been getting. They could do so much with that. But for now anyway, this is it for Warwick until he decides to return

Three stars barely for the good qualities, but overall a letdown. Also, I loved the idea of clover bullets. Shame they didn't really utilize it properly

-- Wes Wall.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Not for everyone, but fun if you're the type
13 April 2023
Now, for those wanting a good horrific killer Leprechaun movie that takes itself seriously, this is probably the closest you'll get. Now, that doesn't mean this is legit horror stuff, this movie is funny as hell. But the Leprechaun is easily the most cruel and murderous here he's ever been. Warwick Davis is as always a hoot. In fact, and this is a first for the series, all the acting is honestly really good. All the rap could be a drag for some, but that's what the fast forward button is for. As for laughs, this movie is filled with them. Possibly the funniest Leprechaun movie. I particularly lost it during the Lep and blind woman scene. Plus, the Leprechaun does his own rap. What more can you want!?

If you hated the others, good god why are you still watching?

-- Wes Wall.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Leprechaun 4: In Space (1996 Video)
9/10
Why not?
13 April 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Ok, let's be honest. If you've made it to the fourth film and STILL expect legit horror, you deserve to be disappointed. After the lunacy of the first three, this one nosedives further by sending the little lep into space, several years before Jason would do the same. You get exactly what you're wanting. More Leprechaun, more death, more humor. The film pretty much serves as a parody of the Alien movies, with the Leprechaun filling in for the Xenomorphs, which is a stupidly great concept that works. Then of course, at some point, it also randomly becomes an homage to The Fly(both the original and remake), cause why the hell not? I have nothing but love for the first three films, and this one keeps me in that same mindset, between Lep, the humor, and Debbe Dunning of Home Improvement being here for some reason. Unfortunately, this one suffers issues that didn't quite plague the other movies. While the acting in these has never been top notch, it's probably at its cringiest here, aside from Warwick Davis of course, and the actor playing Sticks(who is also memorable in Friday the 13th Part 5). Plot consistency is weird too. Tina suddenly dropping her pacifist perspective because Dolores died? Uh, they had like one conversation in the whole film. Why is Tina moved to that point by THIS death, but not the previous ones? Probably the most grating issue is the really really bad effects, which makes it appear the film had the budget of a cheap porno. And it backs that up at times. Ball gag, girl describing a bunch of marines ripping all her clothes off, random nudity, Tina getting her pants ripped off by Mittenspider. Look, I'm cool with this in film as long as the actress is ok with it, and it works with the plot. Here, it feels like it's just there to be kinky, and just comes across as gratuitous. It doesn't hurt the movie really, but does make one role their eyes.

Again, the film remains mostly unscathed by these issues, and Warwick helps keep the film in the same spirit as the first three. As long as you're good with lunacy. If you didn't like the previous ones......why are you still watching? What are you expecting to get from here on? Wasting an hour of your life on this movie is just something you should have seen coming at this point, you know?

-- Wes Wall.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Improvement
9 April 2023
Warning: Spoilers
The theatrical release of Justice League was bad. Not as bad as BVS or Suicide Squad, but still bad. This, the true cut of the film, is a definite improvement, but still manages to end up mediocre. I won't fault the movie for the four hour run time. It is a directors cut, after all. But it does make watching in one sitting rather difficult. Like previous movies, it tries too hard to be awe inspiring with lengthy scenes that easily could have been trimmed. Steppenwolf(I hope I spelled that correctly) is definitely portrayed as more of a legit threat now, though he's still a bit bland. The good news is, the cast delivers. Gal Gadot is, as always, in her element as Wonder Woman. She's literally the best thing about this whole series. Henry Cavill does good with what little time he has, Jeremy Irons is fun, Ben Affleck is a good Batman, Aquaman and Cyborg are both great, and though I cannot stand Ezra Miller, I have to admit his Flash is good. Jesse Eisenberg and Jared Leto unfortunately return as Lex Luthor and Joker, but thankfully just cameos. The real treat is, we get a teensy bit more of Deathstroke, a couple of bits with Martian Manhunter, and an absolutely fearsome Darkseid appears a few times. Not the most intimidating version we've seen, but he was still scary as hell. I do wish they'd done his story a bit different though. Watching him get his ass kicked by Ares and then dragged off the battlefield by Parademons was honestly rather disatisfying, and took his intimidation factor down a bit. But, regardless, his presence is both memorable and fearsome.

While I do find the movie lacking, I'm very happy for Zack Snyder getting to release it. What happened to his daughter was horrible, and my heart goes out to him. He deserved to have his project completed, and regardless of my opinion, I'm glad it was made

--Wes Wall.
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Terrifier (2016)
10/10
Very pleasantly surprised
25 March 2023
Warning: Spoilers
The short films used for All Hallows Eve were a great warmup to introduce us to Art the clown, but this movie takes it and really delivers. It's really impressive when you consider this was funded on indigogo, and is better than most professional Horror films coming out at the same time. Really decent makeup effects for the mysterious woman make for a solid opening, and we have a good cast, particularly the beauty playing Tara, who I really hoped would survive the events. But, Art had other plans. And speaking of Art, he's great. He's what I expected Pennywise to be way back when I watched the IT miniseries(with no prior knowledge of Stephen King's story). He has everything you might want. The silent killing machine reminiscent of Michael Myers, combined with a warped sense of humor that rings of a silent Freddy Krueger. It's a great performance, and a very memorable character, feeling like an evil version of Harpo Marx. The gore and violence definitely makes this movie not for everyone, so definitely go in prepared.

I was very satisfied, and don't understand the low ratings here. I dig this clown -- Wes Wall.
8 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Decent for what it is
13 March 2023
Folks are a little too harsh here. It's definitely not a movie experience in the slightest, nor did I go in expecting it to be. It's just a collection of possible scenarios that could have come from the scenario that started Under the Red Hood. Did any of you really expect anything different? Some bits are of course better than others, some are downright creepy, some are lame. In the end, it's just a fun little game you're playing, and I had fun with it. Sure, it lacks the depth and epic tone of the movie it spawns from, but it's not supposed to have those. I can't five it a full 10 star rating, simply because it isn't a legitimate movie experience, and lacks the substance to earn that rating. But as a fun little time killer, I was satisfied.

-- Wes Wall.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Fantastic
12 March 2023
Warning: Spoilers
What can I say, this is by far my favorite Justice League movie. The story, while not exactly original, is excellent. The idea of evil duplicates of heroes in other universes is a really fun concept. I do wish we'd seen more of Jester. Batman having to work with a heroic version of Joker would be a lot of fun. The theme music, holy crap, its amazing and epic, and I love that they reused it for Justice League Doom. The Crime Syndicate is well played, and Owlman especially is a memorable villain. He discovers dimension hopping, and his only decision with it is to murder every living Earth creature in every dimension because "it's the only action that would serve any purpose." Damn!

It's also cool that this was originally written to bridge Justice League and Justice League Unlimited, and with some exceptions(Hal Jordan among some others), it still can. I always watch it in-between the two despite the few differences.

The movie does have a few issues, but nothing that hurts it. Ultraman could have had a bigger presence. He really just comes across as a thug with Superman's powers. No real motivation for his evil pursuits other than being a jerk because he can. Superwoman is a psychotic killer, but she also is obsessed with power and wealth. Her going along with Owlman's plan makes no sense considering she has to die in the plan. There's no way she could misunderstand. He's very clear in his intentions. She's too obsessed with power to think dying is a cool goal.

The voice actors are great, though I would have loved having the original voices from the Justice League cartoon as at least the League, if not their duplicates as well. Can you imagine Kevin Conroy delivering the "We both looked into the abyss" line, or a more sinister Conroy as Owlman explaining his views of life being meaningless? Would have been amazing. But, as I said, the voices we got are great.

Always enjoy this little masterpiece of animated superhero goodness. It's nonstop thrills from start to finish

-- Wes Wall.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Very solid anthology film
28 February 2023
Warning: Spoilers
Let's face it, we're all here for Art the clown, and this movie definitely delivers. Although we're not given any indication as to exactly what he is(human/demon/evil entity), it's nice to have an evil clown that's actually scary(Pennywise just never did it for me). The surrounding story with the babysitter and the kids is a nice touch, and all three act it well. The first story(utilizing a short film the director made before) is definitely eerie, easy to follow, and introduces Art to the world. The whole Satan thing at the end is weird and never explained, and I'm not big on rape in these films, but it's still well done. Definitely had me curious for more. The second story(filmed for this movie) dumps Art in favor of an......Alien? Ok, Art has a cameo on a painting, but......what!? Maybe this would work better if all three stories were vastly different, but the final story is about Art! How do you make two Art stories, with a weird alien story slapped in the middle!? Anyway, lazy obvious filler aside, the alien tale is decent, and contains some well done scares.....though the costume is pretty hilarious. The third story is probably the best, and really shows off Art. His stalking nature is beyond unsettling, and what he does to his victim is beyond terrifying. The ending is abrupt, but a satisfying twist. Overall, I enjoyed myself. Definitely a good intro to this newer horror villain.

But an alien? What!?

  • Wes Wall.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Decent cheapie
25 February 2023
I feel the negative reviews are a bit harsh here. Honestly, as far as cheap horror flicks go, this one is pretty decent. The story and plot elements had a lot of good potential, and there were genuinely good plot twists near the end. And kudos for not making the title character just a cheap cgi monster, and we instead get a nice makeup job. Certainly not the scariest of boogeymen, but definitely unique. The flaws mostly exist in the characters and performances, particularly the lead actress, who does her best I'm sure, but just doesn't quite sell it. The way the characters are portrayed and the cheesy dialogue is at times impossible to get behind, but this is to be expected in a movie like this. No, this isn't a major horror masterpiece. It's a decent thriller that makes an excellent time killer. Just go with it, and enjoy the ride. You could do so much worse than The Bye Bye Man

-- Wes Wall.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Fun if you let it be
30 January 2023
Warning: Spoilers
I don't think anybody is gonna give Gamera vs. Zigra any Kaiju classic praise, and for obvious reasons. That said, this isn't so bad. The alien invasion plot was pretty common for both Godzilla and Gamera movies at this point, but this movie went the Ultraman route and had the alien and monster as the same entity, rather than aliens controlling the monster, which makes this a more unique experience for Kaiju fans. The plot flows along pretty slowly, which does make it a drag to watch at times, but overall what we're given is typical cheesy Gamera fun. The environmental message is handled rather nicely, and doesn't come off as too preachy. Heck, even the kids here aren't so bad. They at least act like normal kids, and aren't the ones coming up with all the plans to stop Zigra. As for Zigra, his design is pretty badass. Based off the real life goblin shark, he's a cool looking villain, and memorable Gamera foe. Fight scenes aren't among Gamera's best, but still have the Gamera hokiness we've come to love

Honestly, it's a Showa Gamera movie. If you go in with the right attitude, you'll have fun. Just let yourself be a kid again for an hour and a half, and enjoy yourself

-- Wes Wall.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Slightly overrated, but with good reason
25 January 2023
Many fans will quote this movie as the best of the best when it comes to Godzilla movies. While I do agree that this indeed a great Godzilla movie, I can't name it as one of the best. I don't see this one succeeding in winning over new fans, as the plotpoint, ending, and even Destoroyah himself are callbacks to the original movie, and therefore fanservice. And that isn't a bad thing, but it keeps this from being the best of best. As far as quality goes, that is greatly lacking. The majority of the film drags at the same slow pace as the other 90s films, and consists mostly of scientists and military characters as protagonists. The reporter character is honestly the most interesting character here, but she isn't given a lot to do past the midway point. But, I've dwelled on the negative long enough. This is in fact a solid movie despite those issues. Epic score by Ifukube. The callbacks to the first movie are done with obvious love and handled perfectly. Godzilla's burning form is absolutely badass, and one must commend them for making his actions far more unpredictable, really selling the idea of the major pain he's suffering from his condition. Destoroyah is a great Kaiju, in appearance, concept, and portrayal. Truly a fearsome and evil creature. The final battle and the emotional ending are also among the most memorable parts of Godzilla's history. Like I said, I really enjoy this movie. I just can't lie and say it's the masterpiece other fans say it is, which that's their opinion so it's fine, and I totally get where they're coming from. But, to me anyway, there are better Godzilla movies out there.

I do highly recommend it to all Godzilla fans. If you're an average fan, or new to the series, maybe explore around the previous films some more before you try this one. You really do want the full effect of the ending, and not having it would lessen the experience for you. At least watch the original and the other Heisei films(1984-1994), if not a chunk of the original series of films too

-- Wes Wall.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Not for everyone, but very enjoyable for the right audience
21 January 2023
Warning: Spoilers
A lot of Godzilla ripoffs have come and gone, but Gamera remains the most memorable, and with good reason. Daiei did a great job creating a unique character and story for their giant monster, and managed a whole franchise of their own that still goes on today. The film itself certainly requires a specific taste, but even compared to later entries, it holds pretty strong. My 10 star rating is generous, and to be honest, it probably deserves less. But I give some extra points for the obvious effort to do something new while still copying Toho's homework. That's not at all easy to pull off, but Gamera managed. And more bonus points for the Plan Z idea(no, not Plankton's). No oxygen destroyer. No planes or Empire State Building. This film comes up with the idea of launching the giant turtle on a rocket to Mars. It's goofy, hilarious, stupid, and epic in all the right ways! Problems exist, and especially in this poorly edited American version. But even this version retains the charm that exists in the original version. The extra scenes with American actors are likely to put some to sleep, though I honestly didn't find them bad, particularly the heated television debate scene, which I found rather funny.

Overall, giant monster fans should find this enjoyable. Gamera fans who want to see where he started will find it fascinating. Average movie fans......may wanna skip this one. It's definitely not for them

-- Wes Wall.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Uncanny
13 January 2023
Warning: Spoilers
It's rather odd to say, but while there are certainly other bad Godzilla movies, this is the only one I can honestly call boring. Whether you watch the Japanese or American versions, you're in for a rough time. Both are boring. The American version at least has amusing dialogue, "Banana oil!", plus hearing Yogi Bear in a Godzilla movie is absolutely surreal, but all this does little to help. As for the Japanese version, it's way less chaotic, refers the monsters names correctly, Godzilla has his own roar throughout, and lacks the annoying narration of the lead character. However, it drags way more, and there's long long instances of just absolute silence. It was definitely too rushed, which is a mistake many sequels make. There is positive here though, keeping it from being terrible. For one, fan favorite Anguirus makes his debut, and his battles with Godzilla are certainly fun to watch. As the first Kaiju battle, it's clear to see how they evolved over time. Future fights would be far more coordinated and had monsters showing actual personalities. Here, the fight feels far more like two actual animals fighting for supremacy, which is very different and interesting. I honestly enjoy that aspect of it. I also give points for coming up with a unique cool way to dispose of Godzilla. And even the human drama has some merit at times.......it just takes too long to get to the good moments that when they arrive, you don't really feel anything. Kobayashi's sacrifice bringing the defeat of Godzilla is a mirror of Serizawa in the first movie, but because these characters just don't click like the first movie's characters, it doesn't have the same impactful blow when it happens.

All fans should at least see it once. But definitely don't use it if you're trying to get a friend into Godzilla movies

--Wes Wall.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Unfairly Judged
13 January 2023
I feel this version is underrated. Yes, the original 1954 movie was a masterpiece of Japanese filmmaking with a powerful and gripping message. That's beyond doubt. But I find it sad that now that the 1954 version is so widely available, fans have turned their back on this one, even going so far as to calling it mediocre, whereas before, it was regarded as a classic. Remember for a long time, this was what we had in America for the starting point of Godzilla, and it still served its purpose. Raymond Burr is a nice addition, and remained a fan his whole life, even making sure his involvement later with Godzilla 1985 treated the character respectfully. As for his performance, yeah he's pretty bland at times, but it oddly helps with the shock of witnessing the destruction. And ok, the trickery for having him interact with characters from the 1954 movie is obvious now, but I still appreciate the effort in keeping the story consistent with characters.

Is the Japanese version better? Of course, it's the original, with Ishiro Honda's vision fully onscreen. But don't pretend this one is bad. It's simply a different perspective on the same story, and it was indeed a starting point for many many young fans back in the day. It's an important film, regardless.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Ant-Man (2015)
7/10
A not perfect, but fun ride
3 October 2022
When I first heard of this movie way back when it came out, I thought it was another spoof film, like Kick-Ass. Little did I know. Anyhow, Ant-Man is a really fun little movie, definitely a lesser film than other Marvel entries, but still holds its own overall. The story is easy enough to follow, Scott is likable, and Paul Rudd is a delight in the role. So, what keeps it from a higher ranking? Well, it's hard to pinpoint my reasoning there. There's no major issues that make it bad, it just kind of slows down at times. I think maybe a lot of the science behind the technology of the suit was difficult to keep up with at times.....or I'm just a dummy, which actually is true, so nevermind. Most of the humor works, some doesn't. The final fight is spectacular despite a rather bland overall villain. All in all, a good intro for the hero, but I honestly feel all of his later appearances are better.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Vile Woman
1 October 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Priscilla Dean had been a big name in the silent era, acted alongside some great comedians, worked under the great Tod Browning many times, and held her own with Lon Chaney more than once. Unfortunately, she's not remembered today, despite her obvious skills. Her career came to an early end with the arrival of talkies. Her voice, while by no means a bad voice, just didn't register well, and she soon faded away, finally retiring in her thirties. One can only hope her years after were happy.

As for the film in question, it's an enjoyable little court drama with Dean playing a rather vile step mother, willing to let her son be locked up for her crime, simply because he isn't her real son. This film seems to get mostly negative reviews, but I found it very interesting, and certainly the best of Dean's talky era films. I felt the ending and some of the court setup was hokey, but the plot itself held my interest. 9 stars from me. Definitely good to see Dean in something worthwhile during a dark point in her career.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Still waiting on that postal card
25 September 2022
Warning: Spoilers
As the movie is a nearly scene for scene remake of the original version, reviewing the plot is unnecessary. I will say that I definitely enjoy this version. Ultimately, the silent version is superior, but this one holds its own. There's many who complain that they reused a previous Chaney film instead of doing something new, which yeah, I understand that. But you also have to understand that everyone was nervous. A lot of stars from the silent era, tended to "fade out" as Echo would say, due to their vocal acting not being on par with their physical acting. Nobody knew if Chaney would still be a big success in a sound film, so they played it safe by doing a story that was already a hit, and one that would allow Chaney to play with his voice a bit. Nobody knew this was going to be his last movie at the time the idea was presented. Chaney is definitely a great star even with his voice. The man could do anything. Harry Earles Returns as Tweedledee, and while the bad sound quality and his own accent make him hard to understand on first viewing, he's honestly my favorite part of the movie. He's a mouthy foul tempered hoot, and I love it. I don't think anyone is going to argue Ivan Linow as a great actor, but I will say, he's a far mare convincing strongman than Victor McLaglen was in the original. Though, McLaglen did beef up after the first one, so he could have pulled it off. Lila Lee brings a lot of sass and energy into Rosie, and she's honestly a lot more fun than Mae Busch was in the first film in my opinion. While the film is mostly the same as the first, some more bits were added, such as explaining where the ape comes from, and why Echo keeps him around. I like the extra bits like that. Tye courtroom scene with Echo's confession is honestly not as tense here, and was performed far better originally. Echo confessing on his own at the last minute, was a much better and more dramatic touch than him taking the stand as Mrs. O'Grady and being unmasked. However, the ending here is far better than the first one. Echo going to prison is a lot more believable than everything being dropped. It also gives us a very emotional final moment where Chaney says goodbye, boards the train, smiles to the camera saying "I'll send ya a postal card!", and leaves the movie scene forever, passing on the torch to the new era of filmmaking. It's a perfect ending for a perfect actor. Sure the first one was better, but this one is great for what it is, and I appreciate having it.

--Wes Wall.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

Recently Viewed