Reviews

We all know that there are movies which can take the violence very far and shock us with grotesqueness, and then leave us disturbed with statements of nihilism, fatalism, and pessimism of some sort. But what determines their quality is whether there is some overarching message, a statement, or if a film is some kind of metaphor for themes that transcend the violence you see. And usually the feedback depends on whether the audience thinks the statement is valid even if they hate the gory scenes.

The Farm is one of those movies which shocks you pretty hard with the exploitation violence but I think it fails to display any meaningful statement or purpose justifying time spent to watch it. Of course most people will think that the point is to make the viewer think about the violence done to the animals in the meat and diary industry. But the director and writers of the Farm fail miserably in this attempt and, ironically, they fail to make a good point exactly because the film so shallowly treats this topic and turns I into a joke.

There is no subtlety of the story, or a nuance of any scene that elevates it somehow to make you think about anything. No profound conversations about the similarities between all living beings. No discussion or developing of any character in any way.

Even the director of the film states they are neither a vegan or a vegetarian, so clearly this violent, but ultimately stupid and juvenile film wasn't made by somebody who genuinely cares about the mistreatment of animals and wants to send a message. The film is literally made to make $ by paying their actors as little as possible. Thus, in a sad irony, exploiting them.

If PeTA, the organization known as People for The Humane Treatment of Animals, can make a much better film by simply releasing footage from the meat packing factories then this says a lot about how stupid this film is.

I am fully aware that this film holds a special place in people's hearts. It is a very unusually cool cartoon for the 80s era soviet block. But that pretty much sums up the virtues of this animation.

What you see in this film probably does need describing since you most likely watched it already. It is a parody spy film in a world where cats control the world and mice are oppressed. The plot is just ok. Why this film still sucks is that it obviously shows a very strange, distorted, often cringe-worthy interpretation eastern europeans had of capitalist west film and animation. The result is not good at all. The animation is entirely consisting of character tropes, and parodies to American and European films of 80s and prior decades. On top of that it is also filled with generic stereotypes, some of them are very disturbing ethnic stereotypes also.

The quality of animation is probably better than most stuff you could see coming out of USSR influenced animation studios. Not best "of all time" but just one of the better ones of a decade at the time.

Despite the homages and references to western world media, the story and characters in this game still pick a stereotypical "greedy criminal capitalists" as the archetypal villains of the film. It may be presented in a cooler way, but it is still noticeable, even in ineffective, propaganda. It shows what the writers and animators of the cartoon thought "consumerism" and "capitalism" were and presents a caricature of because the "bad guys" of the film are basically greedy, they want to buy stuff, and the bad guys are also culturally perverse (at least supposed to be)

Visually it is a hit and miss animation and art. In some scenes it looks great and even cute. Other parts of the film show ugly disturbing things that do not match other scenes.

I think the only reason people would be giving this film many stars is they probably watched it in their childhood and have fond memories of loving it. I do not blame them, but you have to stay objective and not rate a film based on nostalgia. It is crap.

When you begin watching this movie you think you're in for something good. You think you're going to see a smart thriller with some unpredictable plot twist. The plot twist never comes.

At some point I was hoping there would be some moral twist. For example a radical change in either Anthony Hopkins character or the young obnoxious lawyer character. No, nothing happens. The film doesn't even take a moral stance. Its just like a Columbo episode.

As to the film's morals. It is really strange. The characters who cheat on their spouses are portrayed as normal people, while a husband who kills his wife for cheating is portrayed as a coldblooded killer.

Anthony Hopkins was as usual enjoyable to watch, but the other actors just annoyed me throughout the film

1408 is an above average Stephen King style film that has pretty good scares and some touching moments. Just like in other films based on Stephen King's books the main character Michael is haunted by his past demons which seem to materialize throughout the film. As can be seen from the trailer there is a sick child involved, so you see what I am talking about.

Visually the movie is done pretty well. The hotel is scary, the ghosts are scary, and there are plenty moments where you will be scared out of your seat. There is not too much gore, which is a good thing as the film manages to be an effective horror movie without it.

What 1408 does lack is well developed characters. The best movies, especially the ones based on Stephen King's stories, have well developed scary characters to represent evil. They may be demons such as in IT or The Stand. They could be aliens as in Dreamcatcher, or werewolves like as in Silver Bullet. Here however, there are manifestations of evil that the protagonist goes through, but there is no personified demon or evil he might have to face. This means there is no well defined conflict between the good and the evil.

1408 is still a great film that does not follow the trends and has no clichés. You will not see body parts and blood splatter on the screen or any sex scenes, but you will still enjoy the film and be scared.

I would say that although this film does have its good moments, its not as good as many say it is. First half of the film is pretty intriguing and mysterious. You can't help but wonder what you would do in the situation of a man who has been locked up in a room for unknown to him reasons for fifteen years.

The film goes downhill after Oh Dae Su gets out of the prison and starts seeking revenge. The plot has been made way more complicated than it had to be. What I found most annoying is various sentimental scenes where a piano is playing and we supposedly get to see someone's emotions or their "softer side" . I did not like it because I thought it took away from the continuity of the movie and its straightforwardness.

When I said the plot is too complicated I meant not only that but also that its a very unrealistic plot in which characters do not act the way, I think, people would act in real life. Its just dumb sometimes.

There is also a pretty tasteless sex scene that is just painful to look at.

I feel like this movie is intentionally glamorized by the director and does not reflect real human emotions. I feel like he was copying Fight Club or similar movies made in the west.

I really don't like to say bad things about most movies I watch, no matter how bad they are. I also like 80s horror movies. CHUD, unfortunately, is a not a good movie. It is very silly and even funny sometimes in places where it was intended to be serious.

The dialog is hard to believe and its annoying sometimes because half the time it makes the movie go by very slowly when I wish I saw some action happening.

Cinematically it doesn't look good either. You never actually see the monsters, and when you do see them, the masks and makeup are poorly done. They are green and they have Christmas lights for eyes. Half the movie is set in a dark sewer where nothing is happening until the end of the film. Even with the bad makeup these monsters could have been made to play a bigger part in the movie. So that is kind of a disappointment. There is a funny scene where some guys are trying to contact someone while the guy near the other line is yawning in your face. There is also a funny part where one of the characters swallows a quarter when preventing someone from making a phone call. That was funny too.

CHUD is based on a pretty interesting premise though. Having scary hungry mutants populate the sewer is simple yet scary. Its just not carried out well.

I must say that CHUD is very watchable, despite its shortcomings. Its not that bad. Its funny because its silly and some of the actors are doing pretty good job.

There are old movies we watch today either because we like eighties' movies, or because we are interested in the actors, or because we are interested in the subject. Less Than Zero has it all. Its a story of friends whose lives are threatened by drugs and other life problems like search for money and education.

This takes place in a very eighties' like setting. You see all the fashions and style that you will immediately associate with the decade. I feel, however, that the captured eighties' feel here is not the kind that you would associate with glamorous "new wave" music, or fads like rubic's cube or pacman.

Less Than Zero does present a pretty grim picture of a drug world that can destroy lives and make people very desperate. This could have become made it a very good movie, but there are just too many distracting scenes and irrelevant dialog that made it hard to watch.

I don't get the point of inserting two graphic sex scenes that have nothing to do with the main plot. Its very annoying. Then there are these non-credible parties that everyone has access too, even though they have just graduated high school. I know these kids are rich, but I have trouble believing someone could simply ask their dad for 50k for no apparent reason and stuff like that.

This movie gets a six out of ten. If you want to see good movies about the danger of drugs watch Light Sleeper, or a Requiem for a Dream. If you want to simply see good 80s movies watch the Breakfast Club or St.Elmo's Fire.

Jesus' Son Can be analyzed from various angles. From a cinematic perspective this is a really enjoyable film. The camera shots are very creative and well done. Diverse in color and imagery as well as in the kinds of characters you will see this movie is an interesting change from most coming-of-age and drug movies you will see.

But let me tell you how this is a disappointing film. This actually bothers me the most. The plot seems to progress as if something pivotal is going to happen and you expect to see a resolution and a change in this man. I don't think this is portrayed well at all. With the deceiving title like Jesus' Son, this movie is very simplistic and shallow in its spiritual content. There are some references to Christianity and Jesus but thats about it. You do not see this man change or accept Jesus. There is nothing like that. What you are presented with is a very man-centered idea that its good to be a "good guy" and to be "compassionate" to people and not do drugs.

But as if the lack of any substantial Christian content were not enough, I think this movie glamorizes sex and drugs instead of emphasizing their vanity. Even in the end, when you think that maybe he is changing there is no indication of any true Christian character in him. Even when you feel like the main character may be feeling compassion and love towards the wretched people he encounters he doesn't show it in any way.

So, be warned, this is not a Christian movie, nor is it a good anti-drug film. Its a very cinematically pleasing noir-style indie film that simply tells you that people should be nice. It is sad that there are very few real Christian movies out there. I can only highly recommend The End of The Spear, Saint Ralph, Francis of Assisi, or Simon Birch as good Christian movies.

I have to give this movie a 6/10 because this is a very decent film that deserves praise. I don't know why so many people hate it. For one the little evil character, Troll, has a personality. The kids have personality as well and they're not some stupid one-sided characters. There are funny jokes inserted in the dialogue and the people who occupy the apartment are funny too. Unlike some movies from the same era this one actually has pretty good special effects that are pretty scary too. Just wait till you see a guy turn into a bunch of plants! Thats gross, but its also good effects. Check this movie out and remember it has nothing to do with the really crappy movie Troll 2.

OK, so obviously this is a super low budget crappy movie on which, it seems, the makers didn't spend much effort on. The movie is bad in that there are some really bad actors, there are super cheesy lines, and there are continuity and plot problems. The costumes and masks for the monsters are very poorly made and have fixed expressions, the events do not make sense in a 3rd of the movie, and the actors who try to sound scary or menacing look laughable. This is like something made by high school students who got their hands on good equipment and watched a bunch of decent horror movies.

It is very easy to see the bad things about this movie because they are obvious but after having watched this film twice I see how there are actually very unusual good aspects in here. I think this film was purposefully made to appear like its a stupid cartoony kid tale but a horror movie in disguise. There are intentional and un-intentional dark humor jokes and there are some parts which are darn creepy. Also strangely there is a pretty decent soundtrack.

I really can't tell if some of the jokes were intentional or not but seeing a kid who screams because he sees green goo and tree branches coming out of his body is funny and scary. Add to that a person who turns into some sort of green pie full of green paste who is eaten by the monsters. These things are funny. Or how about the creepy lady who comes to the unsuspecting family's house to offer them some cake when she makes a comment about Joshua's sister "appetizing! HAHAHA" and the mom goes "WHAT!?" A lot of that cheese is funny, trust me.

On the horror side the creepy parts somewhat merge with the humor aspect of the movie. As ridiculous as it sounds but seeing someone be transformed into green good and then devoured by ugly monsters is darn creepy even if its a bad movie like Troll 2. The final scary/creepy kick comes in the very end of the movie so its worth watching till the end.

Not all actors are bad in this film. I think the actor who plays the kid is a very good actor , he looked very genuine. The dad and the grandpa were also really good and interesting characters portrayed by decent actors.

To me this is definitely a cult-classic, if you are interested in dark humor, bad movies, or like bad 80s horror movies you definitely must watch Troll 2.

There are many movies that tells stories of drug dealers who are unhappy with their occupation, but not all of them paint such a clear character picture like the Light Sleeper. By the middle of the movie I could truly relate to the Willem Defoe character as a person. He has insomnia, he survived his own addiction, he writes a journal, and he cares about the serious questions in life. Most of us haven't sold drugs, but most of us will be able to relate to the torment that the character is going through. Its like being immersed in a sin, knowing that it is bad, and still doing it. As for cinematography, I enjoyed to see an urban setting full of electric lights, and the various people who cannot give the main character any relief for his loneliness. I did not care much for the Susan Surandon character, in light of Willem Defoe's performance she is sort of out of the picture. In the end I had a good emotional resolution. I liked this and I think you will like this movie as well if you are into serious films that tell stories of tormented people.

The Homecoming has a couple of good laughs making fun of the neo-conservatives and war hawks that were so popular during the first year of the war. But the political jokes and references made simply lose their humor value because of their obvious superficiality. There is nothing here that a regular news watcher will find relevant or accurate. So for me this movie fails as a political satire. If you look at The Homecoming as a horror movie it fails at it even more precisely because of the politics involved. Most viewers could not care less about who was right or wrong about the war in Iraq, they want to see a good, or decent, horror movie. The horror aspect of this movie is neither good nor decent. There are no suspenseful scenes where a zombie might jump out at you, there are no claustrophobic scenes where a character is cornered by the zombies, there is no action, there is no gore. Essentially all the components that are supposed to make a horror movie are missing. If you are expecting a funny/scary movie about zombies you should rent one of the "Return of The Living Dead" you will find satire, black humor, and gore. This movie is junk.

East Side Story entertains and informs about an unknown part of Cold War history. What is the purpose of any documentary? To inform the reader through commentary and footage. This one succeeds at both. You will never find many movies whose clips you get to see in here because some of them have been destroyed and some are unaccessible.

You get to see and her music from musicals made in East Germany, Russia, and other countries under Soviet Control. It shows you that the people who made these movies and the people who watched them all look for same things a Westerner would look for, which are pretty women and men singing and dancing on the streets with smiles and (hopefully) white teeth.

First of all I am not even going to compare this re-make to the original because it is unfair to do that. if people wanted it to be like the original they would rent the original from 1978.

On its own Dawn Of The Dead stands out for the same reasons the original stood out. You see horror and gore unlike anything you've seen before. The wounds are realistic. You see brains fly from the zombies' heads. This movie was obvously intended not to hold any realism back. When someone in it, zombie or a human, are shot you see blood sputter and smear very realistically.

Besides the gore realism this movie succeeds at scaring me with genuine "pop out of your seat" scares. You know how some horror movies just scare you with some blood murder scene and leave you scared from disgust rather than from surprise. Dawn of The Dead director skillfully overcomes this and scares you when you least expect it. There are some scenes where everyone is happy and calm and you relax your nerves than a zombie jumps out and your pants suddenly get in danger of being pooped.

I could truly bond with some of the characters and feel their pain and fear. You see expressions on their faces change as they see people around them die and realize that their families are dead. I do think, however, that there wasnt much social commentary in this film, that is its just action action action. There is no pauses or change of pace for viewers or characters to behave differently and reflect somehow on what has happened and possibly see some conections with real world.

Cinematography in this one is not bad. I am not an expert on it, but I think in some scenes the color was too intense to portray feeling, everything looked cartoonishly bright. Then, especially in zombie attack and struggle, the camera was jerking around as if its some journalist filming in a riot. The camera was moved around so much it was hard to follow whats happening. Then the frame rate was reduced as well, probably to add more realism and to cover up the special effects, but was definately not hurting my viewing experience.

I give this movie 9 out of 10