Reviews

Seriously, WTF is this crap? What were they thinking when they made this? I'll admit, I didn't think it was as bad as a lot of other people on here thought it was, at least not until the end, the ending was a no good motherf_cker, as far as I'm concerned. In the middle of the film, Carolyn (Pink's character) is supposedly "killed" by the antichrist, but at the end of the film, we find that it was all a prank and that Carolyn is not killed and the so-called "antichrist", which the ENTIRE MOVIE'S FRIGGIN STORY is built around, never existed, I mean, WTF kind of bullsh!t ending is that? Not to mention it defeats the whole purpose of the film. Biggest waste of time I've ever watched, no wonder it was straight-to-DVD (at least to my knowledge it was).

Well, let's see

THE GOOD:

-The fact that it was based in New York City (good choice of locations, in other words; it might not be THAT big of an accomplishment but it's a start for this movie at least)

-The visuals, for the MOST part, I thought were good (particularly when the army fires all of those missiles/machine guns at 'Zilla)

-The story, not the monster involved with it but the story ITSELF is still in the spirit of the original movie(s)' (he develops/oversizes in the EXACT same way as the original Godzilla)

THE BAD:

-The acting sucked

-'Zilla received hardly any on-screen time (which is actually more or less a good thing, if you think about it)

-The "remade" Godzilla was toned WAY down from the original to the point that it was just too weak to be taken seriously as a giant movie monster (ie: dying from just a few missiles, bleeding from machine gun fire, etc)

-The fact that 'Zilla ran more than it destroyed (and that the army actually caused more destruction than it, like somebody else said) -The "redone" Godzilla's complete lack of intelligence (running into and getting stuck between the bridge cables, chasing a taxi cab around town and underneath a tunnel instead of just stepping on it or blowing it over with it's air wave breathe)

So all in all not a very good movie. Granted there are much worse out there but this I would actually rank lower than most game-based adaptions (and pretty much on par with Mortal Kombat: Annihilation). This is such an embarrassment to the original that they actually went as far as (WARNING: Spoilers for Godzilla: Final Wars if you haven't already seen it)

Having this bastardized American Godzilla get killed off by the far superior original, King of the Monsters Godzilla in Godzilla: Final Wars. Serves the guys who made this movie right, they deserve it for literally crapping on such a popular FOREIGN-marketed franchise. In the near future I'm hoping for another remake, one that's at LEAST in the spirit of the original, not one featuring a big monster that's completely opposite of everything that made the original Godzilla great: intelligent, mean-spirited, violent, and highly destructive. LONG LIVE THE KING, THE KING OF THE MONSTERS! NOT THIS BASTARDIZED DOMESTIC CRAP!

What an incoherent mess this was! From the lack of consistensies to the story to the complete and total contradictions to it (ie: Violet saying that she's out to kill humans and then goes on a mission to find and protect a little boy throughout the entire rest of the movie) to the terrible dialog (and that's being NICE about it) to the unrealistic action; ie: Violet dodging a ton of bullets on a motorcycle, etc etc. WTF?! The sad part is that I actually rented this thinking that I wouldn't actually have anything BETTER to do on a Sunday night then watch this crap. Well, trust me, even on your worst day I'm sure you'll think of something more worth your time, and I guess money for that matter. STAY AWAY AT ALL COSTS!

I just rented this movie today at Blockbuster, and JUST got finished watching it, and alls I can say is this: I absolutely can NOT believe what my eyes were seeing! I mean, it's like Uwe Boll took the name of the game and used it to describe ONLY the situation he put the audience themselves into (whatever qualifies as an audience; I learned the hard way that this movie wasn't a complete, total failure at the BO for nothing, which I will get into later on in this review). The only way the name "BloodRayne" would possibly make any sense for this movie is if he were making a metaphor out of the fate I'm sure he put numerous ones through with this incoherent, poorly acted and utterly confusing mess of a film. Notice how this movie doesn't so much relate to the games than the fact that anyone watching this crap feel like slitting themselves profusely after watching it. Look at that: raining blood from my fists, and my neck, and finally my skull... I DON'T EVEN CARE ANYMORE JUST END ALREADY! Okay, moving on...

First and foremost, this movie has, with a capital N, NOTHING to do with the game to which it was based off of. Notice how Kristanna Loken doesn't look, sound, act, or even remotely resemble the character from the games. I don't recall the game character Rayne humping random guys as she sees fit in the game, much less guys she just met minutes ago as opposed to in the movie, where she's a sexually-active beast without a voice and who looks 40 in this travesty of a flick. I mean, come on, Rayne is a vampire, NOT A SLUT! The fact that Uwe Boll couldn't even grasp this simple and purely straight forward aspect of the game character just shows that his talent and credibility for film making is 0, but of course, we all knew that. And how about old man Kagan... yeah, that's right. In the movie, Kagan is an old hag without any emotion or pitch in his voice, whereas the one we remember from the games was nothing short of a middle-aged damphir with black hair and showed a lot of charisma. The one from the movie was stale and boring, and didn't look like a believable main villain at all. Kingsley portrayed the character in a way so unbelievably stale and strayed far off from the one from the games that one would have to see it to believe it (I, for one, would advise STRONGLY against it). And what the hell is with the time settings in this movie? Why is it in the 1700s in Romania instead of in Nazi Germany during WW II? That I'll never know.

But anyways, even BARRING the fact that this movie is NOTHING like the games at all, there's not much to salvage here. For starters, the realism in this movie is about as believable as the mere thought of the director winning an Oscar for this movie: both are impossible and both will never EVER occur (thankfully). Just look at the repetitively slow-paced sword fighting in this movie. I mean, I sure hope I wasn't the only one who realized that it took the actors in this movie *5* seconds just to perform 2 simple swings with small daggers in their hands in fights during this movie. I forget: are we watching this in slow-mo or something? And how about the cheesy, cartoon-styled gore used during this flick? Does Boll not realize that visuals and over-the-top gore aren't all that make up a movie? Sadly, my answer is no. Boll has proved time and time again that ANYONE is capable of doing anything, even having 3 films in the IMDb Bottom 100 or (shudder) making worse films than Rollerball 02 or Battlefield Earth each time. Seriously, that takes a special kind of talent to do, and only Uwe Boll can do that.

The acting? The acting is absolutely atrocious. Loken, like the rest of the cast during this movie, shows NO emotion whatsoever, nor does she (more accurately, they) have any pitch in her voice whatsoever. Her voice was so incoherent I even had trouble making out what she was trying to say at times, as with everyone involved with the flick (sadly). Their voices were so calm I had trouble comprehending them at certain moments during the movie. I seriously can't recall the last time I ever needed to turn on subtitles just to understand what the actors were trying to address, unless it was on some Spanish channel on Digital Cable, and don't even get me started on the goofs. There are too many to count, possibly even more are found on here than in a single episode of Chappelle's Show, and not in a good way, either.

THE BOTTOM LINE: Please, whatever you do, stay away from this movie at all costs! It is already too late for me, but not for you. SO DON'T WATCH! THIS MOVIE WILL BE THE END OF YOU! MARK MY WORDS! THE ACTING, THE DIALOG, THE DIRECTION, VISUALS, STORY, EVERYTHING ABOUT IT IS ENOUGH TO GIVE EVEN FREDDY OR JASON NIGHTMARES, POSSIBLY EVEN THE TWO OF THEM SHARING THE SAME NIGHTMARE WATCHING THIS WORTHLESS EXCUSE FOR A FILM! BE WARNED!

Okay, let me make one thing crystal clear: you will not see any badly-shown Matrix shots or game clips or anything of that sort here like you may have (unfortunately) seen from the first one, so everyone's minds are safe here... right... sure they are.

This is easily one of the most unoriginal zombie flicks I've ever taken the time to watch, and I've seen Resident Evils 1 and 2 and their likeness to rip off the Matrix at certain scenes. What's there to find in this movie that we haven't already seen from the Night of the Living Dead series, Resident Evil, or Land of the Dead? Besides the fact that it did have very little to do with the game (note: VERY LITTLE... it still has more to do with the game than Uwe ToiletBoll's craptastic original, but that's not saying much at all), I honestly couldn't find one original idea incorporated in this movie, besides maybe the fact that this one had a campus, which is pretty much the entire setting of this whole movie. Yes, I said it, a campus... wow, that really strikes me as a zombie fan to watch a school get plagued with the living dead, and not in a good way, either. So that's one down for the story and originality for this movie.

The action? Well, let's just say, it brought a lot of suspense and thrills, unlike the first one, which brought none, even at it's very few-and-in-between unpredictable moments, but this was WAY too predictable at most parts (which a lot of zombie flicks are, I know, but especially this one), and I never thought I would ever hear myself pointing these sensible things out--like me screaming "it's a zombie dumbass!" (or anything along those lines) at the characters as they are (rather slowly for their level; aren't these supposed to be Grade A zombie-hunting commandos we're dealing with here?) investigating--during a movie; well, this one proved me wrong. Never thought the day would come, too; not mention the fact that most of the characters don't know a zombie when they first see one. In fact, that's basically one of the biggest problems with this movie, is that the characters are so unbelievable when it comes to zombie hunting that it almost makes you wish the zombies kill them off so that they don't eventually stride off into Mary Sue characterhood. If you're one of the (arguably unfortunate) many who watched this on Sci-Fi, you will know what I mean by this. If not... well, you'll have to sit through this huge blob of mediocrity to find out. Sorry, no real spoilers here, folks. =P As far as the direction and visuals go... well, I honestly don't know what to say about the latter as the whole entire movie looked like something filmed numerous years ago (you could tell because of the reception that this looks like something filmed during the late 80s-early 90s; HELLO! It's the year 2006! Did they somehow build their first ever time machine while filming this or something?). In fact, the visuals themselves looked like some horribly animated, choppy-as-hell blend of pixilated mess (as you could tell from watching the movie on Sci-Fi... if you even had the guts to do so to begin with that is), which is another rather questionable error imprinted onto this movie. The direction was yet another fault in this movie and, although a considerable improvement over the first House of the Dead (which is to be expected from any movie NOT directed by Uwe Boll, that's for damn sure), one could still tell needed a lot of work in order to pass as being a George A. Romero-caliber zombie flick (if that's even possible). That, and maybe some technicality in other key areas, and lots of it, too.

The acting? Well, what can I say, it's pretty bad. I know that's what's to be expected or even encouraged out of a B-flick, as is the atrocious dialog used throughout this movie, but the thing that strikes me as a rabid viewer of horror movies is: do many people even take the time to ponder whether to pass it off as being a cheesy B-flick or a serious one that's meant to deliver the goods and not bring out unintentional laughs? That's the question, a question that may go by answered, ever unfortunately.

All in all, I would say that's an enjoyable zombie flick if you would decide to just, for one day, sit down and watch this on your futon, bed, couch, whatever, and TRY to enjoy it, and not try to point out it's (rather obvious) flaws as you see them. In short, I must say it was an enjoyable movie, but I can't honestly call it a good one by any stretch of the imagination--though it DID have it's moments like Paris Hilton's face being depicted and shot during a shooting practice scene, man was that NOT priceless or what?--. Aw well. At least for this one, you can enjoy it despite it being a bad MOVIE, counting the suspense and chill factors that it DID manage to bring in at some extent--unlike some other truly despised zombie flick out there, one worse than this in virtually every category--whereas the first can't be enjoyed at all unless you get a kick out of seeing the same zombie get shot 12,000 different times in one scene. In short, it's much better than the first one, but that's not saying much at all. Don't believe me? Just watch it the next time it airs on Sci-Fi (or better yet, in the next hour; they're showing it again apparently), and boy will you see...

I rented this movie free with Constantine which came bundled in with my Blockbuster Rewards program at my local Blockbuster, not knowing what else to rent besides this and like, persay... Interview With the Vampire, which was sitting just a row or two away from it under the Horror section of the store, which sparks this whole controversy... is that thing a horror movie or another failed attempt at trying to recreate a video game, on screen? I was so flabbergasted and let down by the destruction of a great game franchise that I'll never forgive myself for renting this instead of Interview With the Vampire.

First, the acting. There's really not much to comment on nor salvage here seeing as there's just not enough source material to justify that the cast and acting job was done well enough to please the audience. You have legion upon legion of zombies, and a bunch of orally-challenged teenagers who try to act like they are in a Shakespeare drama, and very badly at that. With horrible and corny dialog that was just as badly acted out and sought after as the lines themselves, this movie gives you lines like "it's okay, I'm on the pill" and "this is the Island de la Morte, which is Spanish for death in case you don't speak Mexican," and those are just to name a couple of the so-called "lines" in this film. But the worst line of them all, which, mind you, IS NOT A LINE, merely a blatant reference as to justify that this film is something it's not, is one referring to "a f'ing George A. Romery movie," and that's coming from some character who wouldn't know the first thing about what makes a zombie action flick great. As far as the acting itself goes, you have one Asian girl, who, oddly enough, manages to handle two desert eagles while the one guy on their crew apparently has trouble handling one, and when it came down to the bullet-time and Matrix-esquire shots being used throughout the action, you found that same exact duel-wielding girl to be too scared to do anything about the Security Council of Living Dead Creatures one second, and see her going Neo on a ton of them the next... some "scared-out-of-her-wits" character.

Then there's the action... what action? What is there to find in this movie that we haven't seen from Lord of the Rings, Jaws, Das Boot, Pearl Harbor, Star Trek, and even and especially the Matrix? Absolutely nothing. The action scene preceding the human invasion of the "House" of the Dead had the potential to be good or perhaps the only thing that could potentially save this movie from all-out crapdom, but when you watch it, you will find that it's nothing but constant blatant ripping of the Matrix, foreplay of clips from the video game used throughout, camera spins around each character as they are shooting, and worst of all, you will find that the same zombie is being shot a dozen times... wow, that sounds like great entertainment... yeah, to a mentally-challenged, brain dead pubescent teenager who likes whatever he sees. For instance, a bullet. He sees a bullet fly, bullet-time style as to copy the Matrix, and rips a tiny manhole in a zombie's flesh... nice try, Uwe Boll. You may please Little Johnny with your horribly distorted and not even remotely well put-together action scenes, but you're not impressing anyone who's been a fan and follower of zombie flicks since George Romero's heyday. Sorry, you're not. You may think that you are, but as a die-hard fan of zombie horror, I can tell you that you aren't.

But the area where this film fails worst at is the story. Even barring the fact that it has little-or-no correlation to the game whatsoever, you are pretty much left with a story coming from something you might see on a Saturday Morning TV show. You have a group of all-but-smart twentysomethings who make a trip to the supposed "Rave of the Year" which, to the viewer's dismay, has a bunch of Asian women dancing in front of a banner on stage of the Sega logo who strip-at-random. As a matter of fact, the first few scenes of this tragic movie involve women who strip for no apparent reason, just to try to appeal to the audience in ways which later are thwarted by an uncanny premise of some incidental coincidence which was all-but-waiting to happen by they the audience themselves, which plays as the sole culprit of the tragedy at hand: the island is completely deserted and there's blood everywhere. And just what would a normal teen do in that situation? Just ask yourselves that before taking the time and bravery out of your cue to watch this film.

Even the title itself is insulting. As the name kindly--or unkindly--suggests, the premise of the film is based solely on a house crawling with spirits of the dead, which sparks yet another question in itself: house? What "house"? This "house" is nothing but a shack that's much larger on the inside than out and shares no symbolism to the Curien Mansion in the best-selling Sega game whatsoever, which is the culprit of this mess, a mess too sizable for any director to clear up, unfortunately.

The verdict: this movie is TRAGIC, to say the least. It teaches no lesson to be told and bears no motive other than the fact that it's premise is detrimental to the cause of the game. All things considered, this could quite possibly be the worst film ever made. I rented it for free, and still felt ripped off.

0 STARS! I know as well as anyone who thought the same about this movie as I did that the least that I can give this so-called "movie" is a 1-star rating, but that's what it TRULY deserves!

I just watched and rented Alone in the Dark today just to see how horrible it was, and I must say it was the worst pile of crap I've ever considered watching, second only to Rollerball 2002. I sat through the very first scene in the movie thinking "okay, this isn't that bad," but from there, things not only went totally wrong, but they got worse as this tragically slow movie progressed, with all this bland, boring, and cheesy dialect and acting used throughout this travesty of a film. That "I thought you were dead, @$$hole!" line made me cringe (her "boyfriend," Edward Carnby, came home expecting to be greeted by a sweet kiss from his lover, and instead he is blessed with a hard slap across the face and scolded with some horribly distorted and outspoken voice throughout the acting involved by her character in part) as did much of the movie in it's entirety, with things not only happening unrealistically (apparently three shots to the limbs didn't kill a guy, but running his head through a box filled with spikes and fish inside did) but without a reason, with the aforementioned guy chasing some random people's cab around town for reasons that were not introduced or mentioned. Everything about this movie was so horribly distraught and underwhelming that I didn't even finish watching the rest (I stopped at the part in which there was some random sex scene involved; Tara Reid's character, Aline Cedrac, suddenly rousts an already asleep man from his sleep and the two start "hittin' it" from there... oh boy, now I've seen everything!) There was nothing to like about this movie, NOTHING! Even the action scenes were mediocre at best, that is, if you manage to stay tuned long enough to watch them. Unfortunately I only managed to catch the ones at the very beginning, and those weren't that good. Not nearly good enough to redeem this god-awful piece of trash in any way, shape, or form.

The bottom line: "Alone in the Dark?" It should be renamed "Alone in the Theater Begging for Your Money Back Because This Movie Totally Blows" I give it: 0 stars out of 5. Zero! Zip! None! Nada! Nuh-in'! Even though I can't rate it any lower than 1 star, that's how much I would TRULY give this movie if only the voting system would permit such, because this movie is nothing worthy of anything higher... maybe half a star at best.