Reviews

I have to start by saying I'm a big fan of the original 3 movies, which unlike many other trilogies got better as they went along.

Unfortunately this was an episode too many, far too long after the last. Most noticeably for me was that Harrison Ford did not seem at all comfortable to be back in this role. At 66 his physical demeanor did not carry and his performance was unbelievable, and I feel he knew it.

Trying to resurrect Indiana Jones was a brave move, and was likely fueled by the potential profits rather than any loyalty to the legend. Given the history of this series I expected something special to make up for an aging lead star. I was sorely disappointed. It delivered a mediocre story that left me wishing the series had been left alone. The fridge scene made me cringe. Second choice would have been to find a new leading actor. But ideally leave the legend alone.

The only real joy in this movie was John Hurt's performance. Awesome as usual! And credit where credit's due, Harrison Ford looks well for 66 and he did a fair job, just not good enough for the legend of Indiana Jones.

I finish with an appeal to the film industry. Please stop trying to cash in on old hits. If you must resurrect old films, please pay them the respect of thinking about the art of film making first, and the profit second.

I can't figure this out, and I sincerely apologise if this is a useless review but Tarantino has done it again.

I find it difficult to explain why this film hit the spot when so many others did not. Tarantino definitely has a handle on reality, and doesn't need to create artificial story lines and make believe monsters to thrill and intrigue his audience. This is a film that illustrates our everyday idiosyncrasies and shows us both the real, yet dark side of humanity, and shows us that real life is far more exciting and intriguing than fantasy.

The dialogue between characters was funny, real, and interesting. Bringing together a variety of different characters (eg cheerleader, successful celebrity, ghetto girlie etc), he illustrates the common traits of the human psychology that we all pretend don't exist. Most other films take us into unrealistic fantasy, Tarantino knows reality is far more exciting!

Kurt Russell surpassed himself. He's been absent for too long, and his part in Death Proof leaves me wanting to see more from him. His acting was superb and I hope this film relights his career and we see more from him soon.

I definitely saw touches of Pulp Fiction in this film, but in a subtly different way.

Cinematography was awesome, and the use of weird and wonderful camera techniques made this film more than just interesting.

When it comes to films I'm a tough critic, I'm disappointed far more than I'm surprised so giving a 10 out of 10 for me is very unusual.

This is a clever, interesting, and unusual film that will appeal to serious lovers of movies. Tarantino is both a movie scholar and genius. I bow before you Quentin and hope desperately to see more like this.

Many thanks ... Shaun

I waited a long time to get to see this film. I'm a huge Shaun of the Dead fan.

My first impression was that it had a better technical feel than SOTD and was very well made, however, I was struggling to laugh at much of it. There were some funny moments but despite trying hard to enjoy it I'm afraid I was left quite disappointed.

In SOTD there was great chemistry between the two leads, this seemed to be missing in HF. The main character Sergeant Nicholas Angel (Simon Pegg) was an outstanding police officer and could do no wrong, a feature I just don't find funny. I preferred the loser makes good in a crisis theme of SOTD. Nick Frost's character (PC Danny Butterman) was much funnier.

I have re-watched this film again and found that halfway through I became bored and distracted. This does not happen with SOTD which I regularly replay.

I am a little surprised by the high score others have given it. Most people I know personally agree with me, that though it is a reasonable British comedy with some funny moments it is not in the same class as the classic Shaun of the Dead.

Worth watching, but not one for the collection.

I'm very surprised that the IMDb rating to date is less than 5 at the time of writing. I feel it's important to critique this film for what it is, ... a 'B' movie. In my opinion it did not present as such, it gave some lesser A movies a run for their money. The acting was convincing, the characters interesting and the cinematography was superb. The story line was perhaps the weakest part of the film, and for me the ending was predictable, however it kept me interested to the end which is not always easy with me.

I enjoyed the film, though it's a long way from my favorite in this genre. This being said, the production crew should be very proud of it considering it is a B movie. Give them a real budget and I'm sure they would come up with something remarkable.

In the whole scheme of things I rate this movie 7/10 ... but compared to other 'B' movies I would give this a 9.5/10

The proof is in the pudding a they say. I have two small children of 3 and 5 and also a 14 yr old daughter. Finding a new film for them to watch time and time again is a rare blessing but this one is a winner. It's been a long while since I've seen them sit so quietly through a whole film and then ask to watch it again straight after. The last film that had this appeal was "Finding Nemo".

And for us adults ... I loved it, the visuals were superb, the humour was great and there is plenty of stuff going on in the background to be re-discovered on the re-run (yes, I have to sit with the kids sometimes too) A crackerjack little movie for the whole family

I thoroughly enjoyed this movie and to date, this year, it is one of my favorites. The story was excellent although the twist at the end was far too predictable and I knew what would happen far too early. Usually when this happens the film is spoiled for me (like "The Others") but even knowing the outcome I still enjoyed it right up to the end. Looking through the comments of others many people were impressed with the performance from Kelly Overton (Eve), I'm afraid I was not. Her performance seemed to be the weak part of the film to me, in contrast to the amazing performance (or characterization) by James Haven (Don Wake) ... I hope we see more of him. What a great little film, highly recommended to all!

For me this one did not play as well as the first. The change in direction of the story worked reasonably well but seemed a little forced and patched together.

The young boy (Aidan) played by Davis Dorfman was extremely irritating and did interfere with the enjoyment of the film.

Despite these criticisms the film was still quite spooky in places and quite enjoyable.

Worth seeing, especially when alone, though I would say that rather than taking the story to the next level it presented itself as the trailing edge to The Ring

This was truly dreadful! It had a terrible storyline, was poorly acted, and was like an amateur remake of evil dead but not nearly as good.

It took all my tenacity to make it through this one, it's a good job I didn't have to visit the toilet else I doubt I would have come back! This one makes Hammer House of Horror look like a big screen Hollywood epic.

The only value to this movie was the never ending supply of beautiful women. Not a bad one among them!

If you want to letch with your friends after a night on the beer then this one's for you ... else avoid it like the plague!

Though slightly Neo-Esq Keanu does an excellent job of portraying an extremely strong character in what for me was an engrossing film.

The film worked so seamlessly its hard for me to disseminate it into pieces and give an appraisal of each so here is a brief bullet-point of why I thought it was so good.

Strong character played by Keanu, Excellent cinematography, A unique approach to an old story-line, Thoroughly engrossing

The negatives were Keanu was very Neo/Matrix like and his dialog with Lu at the end was a little unconvincing.

Watch this one!

The positives for this film were scene dressing, costume and general movie aesthetics were very nice, however the film left me huffing and tutting in response to poor acting, and a poorly thought out and incredibly predictable storyline. Timeline stories are among some of my favorites but parts of this one just did not make sense and the paradoxical twist at the end was nonsense (How can one person have two different deaths in the same time-line???). If you like your sci-fi time-related story lines to make sense and provoke philosophical thought then this one is NOT for you! As a Canadian produced film I guess I shouldn't be surprised by the huge French bias but English viewers be warned we don't come out too pretty in this one! Billy Conelly's performance was dire too. His distinctive voice and wacky persona just did not carry with his character or the flavor of the film. I couldn't determine whether this was due to a lack of acting ability or poor scripting Altogether pretty disappointing.