Reviews

Firstly the film put me to sleep, not a good start. I woke up the next day and tried to watch the rest. There's a few scenes in the film which offer suspense and the aspects of the Liberian civil war we see are quite dramatic, however this is not an action film. There are some scenes of action which are necessary to drive the plot and provide the reasons by which a small group of men must flee. However these are widely dispersed and the predominant point of the film is to deliver some fairly tedious messages of faith.

It may have done better if it were possible to understand how Khran can be identified as they're hunted. It may have been better if it'd explained why the missionaries hadn't just taken off their shirts and ties and blended in.

An unexciting story on the whole, combined with some awful acting. I hope that some of the money that this film might make has gone to enrich the lives of those without much. If it wasn't for the exceptional camera work and fascinating views of Liberia I'd have rated this a two.

As another reviewer points out, 2014 is the year of Hercules. This is probably one of three or maybe even four. What is almost certain is that you're looking for one of the other ones.

Unfortunately I can't agree with the reviewer who gave this 7 stars. There's no merit in doing something badly. A guilty secret is still bad even if *you* are compelled to like it. You should know deep down it's tripe. Look outward and compare it to a great. Because by greatness (or indeed rubbish) is the 10 star rating defined. If this was a 7 then movies like Alien, Pulp Fiction etc would have to earn another star at least.

Bad acting. Bad script. Bad story. Bad costume. Bad movie. Avoid.

I'm not sure if I was watching the same movie as the other reviewers that have all left 8 and above, it begs the question of what they rating they give a good film.

Personally I'm a big fan of British movies, I do what I can to see them and rent them when they come up. I have a lot of faith in the acting and writing of fellow Brits to deliver. From Blackadder to Four Lions there's a lot of genius in British comedy. Sadly none of it is here.

That said the dialogue and direction are good, there was plenty of quality that helped mask an underlying problem. Eventually the dialogue seems to become very repetitive. After an hour I'd got bored of the whining of the protagonist and the sheer banality of his mate, with too few laughs to lift the movie from being dreary. Just because a movie has men wee-ing in it and talks about STI's doesn't make it edgy or even particularly clever and it certainly doesn't make it funny.

5 stars isn't bad for me and its a nod to the positive aspects of the film. It's better than I could do, but it isn't good.

Okay, there's a number of reviews here already ranging from horrible to mediocre. They really should be sufficient to give you the right idea. But on the off chance they don't...

I started watching The Cure with the best intentions as I'd read no reviews. I figured it'd be in the same vein as Contagion or REC. This is not that film.

Go ahead and watch if you wish. Ignore the warnings presented to you. In a digital era there's little harm in giving something 15 minutes. But! If after 15 minutes the alarms in your mind have yet to ring out "Hmmm this is a bit rubbish" maybe you'll be able to manage the rest of the movie and be amongst those who'd rate this a 5.

An enjoyable little film full of the kind of intense and intimate relationships that you normally only find on a stage. Hopefully that will be enough to set the scene as Compulsion is not really a film, its a theater production put on to film.

Compulsion is two stories that unravel and then combine to become one as you really only get the second story after being fully immersed in the fervor and passion of Amy (Heather Graham). Heather Graham appears to have added more a little Nigella Lawson (Youtube her) to her depiction of a voluptuous gastronome desperately seeking acknowledgement and love.

So too does the other leading character Saffron bring a fine set of hang ups and issues played by Carrie Anne Moss.

Both lead actresses set the movie apart from ennui with excellent portrayals of their characters and through their selling of the story. They also looks fantastic (which can't be bad!).

If you take the movie for the play that it is, rather than the blockbuster you might be hoping for, then you should get on fine.

B Movies seem to be making a big come back this year and this one fits right in there with other legends of the genre ticking every box to ensure that it'll mark low and leave you wondering why you bothered.

Woeful script? Score. Actually the script wasn't so bad although more than a little clichéd. If only the delivery wasn't so abysmal. Acting? Hackneyed characters with poor back-stories. Brought to "life" through the art of people pretending to be someone they're not. Or maybe they were good characters, hackneyed in to existence through bad acting. Scares? You'd think that borrowing the Amityville legend would lend some worthwhile thrills, but you'd be wrong.

The best thing I can say about this movie is that it was only 86 minutes long. Which was plenty.

As the other reviews (at the time of writing) appear to give this movie a glowing bill of health I thought I'd add a little balance. Not least for those who like me check whether a film is worth watching based on the reviews here. Having to dig deep in to other peoples lists to find something that I haven't already seen.

Let me sum this up in the fewest words possible. Don't bother.

I can't work out on what rating system anyone would rate this anything other than poor.

The story is fairly weak and unconvincing. The cast were terrible, wooden and largely difficult to sympathise with. As a result it fails as a thriller. Not a particularly gory movie, although it has its moments and makes a few nods to other gore porn features such as Saw and Hostel, but with little of the cringe-inducing effect. As a horror it also fails. Or perhaps I'm becoming desensitised in my old age.

I have to say, I was grateful when it was all over. Redd Inc. unfortunately falls in to my; "wish it'd had never been made, wish I'd never seen it" bucket.

Now Lady Vengeance was a nice piece of cinematography, it was stylish and competent and had the kind of polish you expect from a particularly good Hollywood movie. To some extent I think this may have let it down.

While Lady Vengeance is part of a trilogy its not a trilogy in the sense that it follows a storyline or set of characters from earlier in its series. Rather its a part of a trilogy of films the explore the theme of revenge or vengeance.

The previous two movies may have contained both gratuitous and graphic images, but given the subject it was kind of expected, perhaps its a certain amount of prejudice on my part but I can believe this kind of brutality occurs in parts of Korea.. In any case apart from one scene where the violence was merely implied (it was the beating of a woman) Lady Vengeance was far less horrific than its siblings.

The film itself wasn't let down by a lack of violence, indeed it contained plenty and some other disturbing scenes as well. But the story didn't have the same raw edge as the first two. Mr Vengeance layered itself with multifaceted reasons and inferred the different things that revenge actually means. Old Boy well its difficult to tell you why Old Boy is so great without giving it away.

Lady V in contrast gave away all her secrets quite early on and the movies centered upon how she got to the point where she could exact her revenge. An interesting story but because it opened up so quickly didn't offer the startling twists and turns that I found made the first two great.

This had to be the most clichéd and predictable rubbish I've seen so far this year, perhaps ever. From the poor script and diabolic acting (and I'm not talking about the monsters) this was a poor effort.

Why the makers decided to try and emulate an American high school, with all its American Prom-goodness I have no idea but it didn't work and it didn't feel credible.

Last thing? Samantha Mumba had to put out the worst Irish accent I've ever heard, and playing the part of a 17 year old? I think they were pushing the boundaries of actors playing young characters even in comparison to the likes of 90210.

Lacking in any of the fundamental elements of the genres it was going for; Horror, Comedy, Suspense. This wasn't even bad enough to become cult.