Maniac's Reviews

Dead Alive



I give it:

This is a film made in New Zealand. Originally called Braindead but changed the title when transfered to the U.S. to Dead Alive.
In particular, one of Peter Jacksons original work on horror-comedies. Yes, the same Peter Jackson that worked on Lord of the Rings. Surprised?
This film has to be one of, if not the, goriest film of all time. Depending on which version you rent.

You rent the unrated version, you get more gore.
You rent the R version, you get significantly less gore.



Onto the review,

Dead Alive is about a zombie disease carrying Sumatran rat monkey. The bite of this monkey turns you into a rotting undead zombie. Well this monkey is captured and taken to a zoo in a small town of New Zealand.
Well in this same small town is Lionel, a shy, submissive, and odd man who's pretty much under the rule of his dominering mother. When Lionel finds a lover his mother forbids it.

But one day when he trys to sneak a date with his girlfriend to the zoo. His mother fallows him, and eventually gets bitten by the zombie disease carrying Sumatran rat monkey.

...do you see where this is going?

She turns into a zombie. Infects a bunch of other people and it's up to Lionel to kill off all the zombies in a incredibly gory fashion.



I think this movie had it's histerical moments here and there. The whole movie is just suppost to be one big gory comedy. But overall it was directed horribly. Partcially this direction was on perpose to make the film seem funnier. But at times it just gets old.

The acting was horrible as well. But again the acting was suppost to be part of the comedy on how bad it was.

This film is suppost to be a guilty pleasure. Well it is and it isn't. Not for everyones taste, (Obviously). And it's certainly not a film I'd like to watch over and over again.

Because it's only real appeal comes in when the gore starts flowing. And that takes a good 45 min to get through the very lagging beginning. And alot of people would find both halfs of the movie disgusting.



It was one of those films i was being a softy on so I gave it 2.5/5 Stars. For putting a unique joke out there.

__________________
"I don't think there's anything to be afraid of. Failure brings great rewards -- in the life of an artist."---Quentin Tarantino

Paths of Glory



I give it:

One of the beginning films the young Stanley Kubrick made.
And it proves that Stanley Kubrick has been controversial ever since he became a director. This film was banned from France and wasn't allowed in until 1975. 18 years after it's release in 1957.

It was based on the book by the same title, Paths of Glory. The book was a minor success and was forgotten. But it wasn't until Kubrick made a movie out of it that the book gained more attention.



The review,

Paths of Glory is anouther anti-war film made by Stanley Kubrick. It's about a promotion seeking general in World War 1 whos fighting the battle from the trenches.

He orders his men to take the enemy hill on the other side. Which is a inevitable suicied mission. Colonel Dax, played by Kirk Douglas, knows its a suicied mission but he can do little about the mission and tells his men to do as the general orders.

Most of the soilders die trying to do as the general commanded, but some survive and retreat back to their own lines. This upsets the general and asks for 3 random soilders to be put on trial for cowardice which will be punishable by death. Colonel Dax thinks that this act is discraceful and trys to defend his men at trial but that does little good.

And it asks the question once again, who is the real criminal? Supposively this is believed to be based on a true story.



I love watching all of Kubricks work. Especially comparing his works he did when he was younger to works he did when he got older. You can definately see a beginning point of a genious trying to find his voice and footing.

There are some shots in particular in this movie that just scream Kubrick all over them. It's anouther thinking film and it does a great job for a film maker that's just beginning his career.

Kirk Douglas does an excellent job of acting. He really brings to life Colonel Dax, and potrays him as a vocal, but unheard hero.

4/5 Stars.

Frankenstein (1931)



I give it:

This has to be my one of my personal favorites of all the old monster movies of the 1930's and 1940's.

Frankenstein was written by Mary Shelly in 1818. An since then has become many book adaptations as well as movie adaptations. Thomas Edison, the man who invented motion pictures, created a small play based on Frankenstein when he was trying out his new motion picture camera.

Basically Frankenstein was made onto film 5 times or more before James Whale made his adaptation of it in 1931. Which would become the most remembered version and would make Boris Karloff an international star.



The Review,

Frankenstein is about man's attempt to play God. And what the consenquences are when a greater power steps out of our control. It also, oddly enough, shows how we are also monsters in society.

Dr. Henry Frankenstein, played by Colin Clive, is a doctor seeking to prove a scientific theory that he can reanimate dead flesh and make it become living again. So he steals a freshly buried corpse from the graveyard. But needs a brain for his experiment. When his assisant accidently drops the brain he was suppost to get he grabs the abnormal brain.

He continues with his experiment only to find his creature he gave life to is a violent, grunting, being. And not at all what he thought it would be. Dr. Frankenstein leaves his monster to get married to his fiance. But Frankenstein escapes and starts havok on the village. And it's up to the Doctor and society to confront Frankenstein's monster head on.



I thought this was a really good movie.
It's amazing to me, all Boris Karloff did was grunt and use his eyes to display a emotion of both sadness and hate.

At times you really feel sorry for the monster because he was treated poorly to begin with. And it's amazing to me how they added philosophical tones under all this movie.
It could mean alot, one example is in a society of monsters we are creating monsters. That kind of undertone which is very evident in this movie.

A true classic, and it stands the test of time. Despite how old the movie is I would recommend it to anyone. Not for a scare factor, but for a factor of "entertainment-for-thought".

4/5 Stars.

Pulp Fiction



I give it:

The film that won Quentin Tarantino the 1994 Palme d'or, the Best Picture at the Cannes Film Festival.

It not only launched Quentin Tarantino's career, and made him almost a directorial god to some people. But it launched John Travolta's lagging movie career.



Onto the Review,

Well this movie is really a tough one for me to review. The movie is so unique, I would rather not distort anything, despite the fact I know for a fact I've seen this film way over 20 times.

Pulp Fiction is about the lives of 2 hitmen and a Boxer. They all have a connection to a man named Marsellus Wallace, who is a crime boss and is pretty much the devil himself.

Jules and Vincent are both hitmen, doing their day to day job and getting money from their crime boss Marsellus Wallace. But on this imparticular day when they goes to kill a man something life changing happeneds. And it's up to Jules and Vincent whether they should continue doing living the life they're living or change it and try to reedem themselves.

After an extremely long day. (I would like to review the day but I can't do that without spoiling what happends for the people who haven't seen it.) Vincent needs a drug fix and gets a bag of herion from his drug dealer, and later that night is obligated to take Mia Wallace, (Marsellus Wallace's wife), out on a date as he promised his boss while he was out of town. But Mia is a coke addict and finds Vincen'ts herion, and thinking it was coke, she snorts it. What happens on the date Vincent has to again turn to some form of redemption or else he's as good as dead with Marsellus.

Butch the boxer has made a deal with the devil, Marsellus, and when he promises Marsellus he'll throw the fight for money. Butch breaks his deal with Marsellus to get more money for himself. And Butch hides out in a motel for awhile until he can catch a train out of town. However, his girlfriend forgets to pack his father's watch. Who's dying wish was to give him the family watch. And Butch must go back into the fire of his own appartment where the hitmen could be waiting for him. And he in the process oncovers his own form of redemption.



God damn I hope I did that review ok. If I did ok on it, please let me know cause that was hard as hell trying to explain that movie without ruining anything in the process.

But basically this movie is indescribable. Some, (like myself), will absolutely adore the film. Some, on the other hand, just won't get the film. It's one of those films you either really love with a passion. Or you just don't get it and thus you hate it.

Believe me it wasn't love at first sight with me either. But once I really gave it some time, it grew on me and I started getting the joke and the movie.

This film goes back and forth in a timeline. So the story being told isn't linear story. Which again like I've said many times is a New Wave type of story. This film has major French influnce. So many film buffs love this movie, but on the other hand people who aren't used to a new style film may not like it.

This film to this day is STILL being disected by film buffs. I'm no exception, and it's partcially the reason I've seen it way over 20 times. Because each time you pick up on something new and it explains the story better.



4.5/5 Stars.

Spiderman 2



I give it:

Being called the greatest superhero/comic book movie of all time. It really is a shining star considering that summer movies are usually garbage in the first place.

And anouther good movie from Sam Raimi who seemed to have really grown-up and away from his horror-comedies. (He made, for those who don't know, the cult classics Evil Dead, Evil Dead 2 and Army of Darkness.) And for anyone who is interested, "Ash", makes a special appearance in this movie.



Spiderman 2 is about Peter Parker's attemps at having a normal life now after being Spiderman for some time now. Because he's living a "double-life", he's failing at his job, his college education and his relationship with his girl next door sweetheart Mary Jane Watson.

Mary Jane wants Peter to attend a play she is preforming at. But when his "double-life" interfers with seeing her preformance, he not only damages his relationship with her but begins to loose his superpowers shortly after breaking her heart.

He then tries to become a little more normal and focases on his college science class and does a report on Dr. Octavius. Dr. Octavius tries to conduct a scientific experiment on fusion for unlimited energy. But when his experiment goes horribly wrong, his four mechanical arms used to control his experiment safely become fused to his body and loses the chip in order to control them. The accident drives him mad and he turns evil so he can try to make his experiment work once again.

Spiderman does his best to fight Doctor Octopus but the more he drifts away from Mary Jane the more his powers are lost. So he decides to give up being Spiderman all together in hopes to make things work with Mary Jane.

Parker's life as being a normal individual seems to work out better for him but the city is going into ruin without Spiderman. But when Mary Jane is eventually put into danger it doesn't take long for Parker to figure out the right thing to do.



I really enjoyed this film. In my opinion it has to be the best comic book film I've seen.

Now I've talked alot about how comic book films greatest flaws are predictibility. Well in this film you have so much going on:
You have the unsteady friend ship with Harry Osbourne, (The son of the green goblin who is funding Dr. Octavius's project.), who loaths Spiderman for killing his father.
You have the romance between Mary Jane Watson and Peter Parker, who are both obviously in love with one anouther but their lives clash and it seems like they will never be together.
You have Dr. Octavius who turns evil because his dreams have crumbled right before his eyes and he wants to redeem his dream by turning to evil to get it all back.

And the greatest thing about this film is you never knew what was going to happen in the first 15-30 minutes of the film. The film let all these situations unfold and told a great story.

Anouther thing I liked about this film was it was a perfect "middle" film. Sure if you haven't seen the first one you might be a tad bit lost on how Peter Parker became Spiderman. But this film offers a slight answer to those who haven't seen the first film during the opening credits.

Now as far as the acting goes, here's where I come down.

Tobey Maguire did a pretty decent job as playing Spiderman, I really have no complaints.

The actor that really made this movie was Alfred Molina, in my opinion he did one of the best preformances I've seen this year in playing his role as Doctor Octopus. He really brought to life his character. Before he became evil, you really got a sense that this man was a professional scientist trying to do good for humanity. He wasn't at all the same character thoughout the whole movie. He transformed his character in a way that you couldn't help but be drawn into him. A great actor transforms his character, always, and draws the audience in and Molina achieved this so well it's worth applauding. It's not oscar winning, but it is very entertaining.

Kirsten Dunst also did pretty well herself. Although she wasn't changing her character as much as Molina did, but then again she didn't need to. She was playing the perfect "girl next door" role.

However...there is one inparticular preformance I did not find believeable or entertaining in this film which was James Franco playing the part of Harry Osbourn. Luckily he wasn't in the movie to much.

Some scenes in the film however I just thought where totally unfit and didn't belong.



This film was very entertaining and I'll give it a 4/5 Stars.

Good reviews, I enjoyed Spider-man 2 too!

Thanks for reviews, an interesting mix of movies.

__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha

still great reviews..i liked spiderman 2 as well...

Unbreakable



I give it:

M. Night Shyamalan's fourth film. That is often, in my opinion, overlooked. Mostly this is because Bruce Willis stars in it and M. Night Shyamalan directed and wrote the story. It has a unexpected plot twist at the end of the film, thus people relate it to The Sixth Sense.

Now is it as good as The Sixth Sense, it depends on how you look at it, probably not though. But it's still a really good movie and I'd watch it anyday of the week. Shyamalan has proved to be our modern day Hitchcock. And he's the type of director you pay him 7$ for your ticket and he gives you 14$ back. So no matter what the relation this movie is with The Sixth Sense, it's definitely worth a look.



The movie is about a man named David Dunne, who finds himself entering and surviving a train crash. Oddly enough, he is the only suviver and without a scratch on him. He makes local news of his survival and upon going to a memorial of the victims who died in the train crash and when returning to his car he finds a card questioning if he had ever been sick. Oddly enough, he doesn't remember being sick either.

David Dunn finnally meets the man who left him the card, Elijah, (also known as Mr. Glass), who suffers from a disease called "osteogenesis imperfecta", a condition which makes his bones extremely brittle. After being sheltered inside having nothing but his comicbooks to read. He is fascinated by superhero's, "unbreakable" men.

Elijah makes a theory that David is a "modern-day" superhero. And he tries to convince him of this, but David is in denial. But after a number of stange occurances it doesn't take long to realize he was born with a gift. A gift he later figures out what to do with.



This is a great movie. The only issue is people relate it to The sixth Sense way to often. Yes, they are similar in alot of ways. But this film is regardless entertaining.

That's the only problem when you hit the big-time. As far as directors go. People will always relate your work no matter what you do. So I think the best way to handle this sort of "directorial critisizm" is for the director to shrug it off and keep making movies.

This film told me a story. It had me entertained all the way through. Although I was bored at some parts because some dialogue just repeated itself after awhile. But nevertheless it had me on the edge of my seat at moments. Then at other moments it had me wanting more of what it was showing me.

That's when you know a movie is brilliant, is when the audience becomes so envovled with the story it's almost like feeding them. This movie did that to me. It opened up a story I wouldn't dare close.

Samuel L. Jackson is a terrific actor. And when he talks it's almost like music and poetry at the same time. He, if anything, made the film best of all. Just out-there characters you just want to watch more.

Bruce Willis also was worth a look. He plays a really good, "down to earth" character in a film that's very out there.



4/5 Stars.

another good review...

thanks for posting

Good review Maniac. I absoloulty adore Unbreakable, as i do all of M. Nights films. Its so incredibly atmospheric. Would you say the film is more about David Dunn? I always thought the film was more about Elijah and his obsession for the superhero. The deleted scenes on the special edition DVD back this up and are excellant, you should check em out. One of the most memorable and moving scenes for me is at the end of the film when David pushes the newspaper towards his son at the breakfast table showing him the headline, and with no exchange of words they just start crying. I love it.

__________________
Pumpkins scream in the DEAD of night!

ok, you've convinced me I need to see this one.

__________________
Review: Cabin in the Woods 8/10

ok, you've convinced me I need to see this one.

Also: nice job with the reviews!!

You know,

funny you should mention about Elijah being the main character. Because when I was writing the review, the first time i wrote the review I wrote it about Elijah. But i ended up changing it due to the fact I wanted to stick with the superhero as the main character and Elijah as his backing. Sort of how that played out in the movie. Elijah was the man helping David discover who he was.

Either way, whoever was the main influence I agree 100% with you. And I saw some of the special features on the DVD and they where marvelous too.

Thank you!

And please go see it, I am pretty sure you wont be disappointed.

Thank you for all the wonderful feedback.

2001: A Space Odyssey



I give it:

A film that basically started the Science Fiction genre in movies. Or atleast was the start of epic Science Fiction films. You can really see where George Lucas got his idea,or should I say basic just for his film Star Wars.

This also was one of the first films, if not the first film, that let you make up your own interpretation on the film itself. The film is so broad and philosophical you can interpret anything you like out of it. Which I think makes the movie more wonderful.

Some say this was Stanley Kubrick's gem of films. It was when he peaked at becoming a influencial director. He scriptwrote with the man who wrote 2001, Arthur C. Clark. With both men on the project it was determined for greatness.

This film changed the way we view films to this day. It set a higher standard for film making and it is marked as #22 on the AFI top 100 films. And some suspect it 2001 was an allegory based on Friedrich Nietzsche's work, Thus Spake Zarathustra.



We being in the Dawn of Man. Where we discover out primitive ape ancestors are still eating berries and haven't learned to eat meat yet. One day tribe of apes pushes anouther tribe of apes away from their own drinking water hole. In the night the tribe goes into hiding but the next morning they wake to see the black monolith before them. It creates an erie sound and all the apes begin to touch the monolith.

Soon one of the tribe's ape's begins to hit bones with anouther bone. Thus our first ape ancestor learns how to use his first tool/weapon. The apes kill the other animals and begin to eat their meat. They eventually confront the tribe that drove them out of their original drinking water hole, this time armed with bones as weapons. And we commit our first act of violence/murder of our own kind.

Then with the bone victoriously thrown in the air we leap into the future and see our evolution, we've made colonies in space and it cuts to our modern day society and we've discovered something on the moon. When excavations on the moon uncover a second monolith and expose it to sunlight, it emits a powerful signal toward the outer solar system. The movie then focuses on a dispatched mission to a moon of Jupiter to investigate the signal's receiver.



On this mission the space team is in commanded by two astronaunts Dave Bowman and Frank Poole, the rest of their crew is is hibernation. The ship is also runned by the HAL 9000 computer who interacts as a human, except the HAL 9000 computer seems to be the perfect machine. And has a perfect record and has never made an error.

The whole crew is unaware of the nature of the mission, they are also unaware of the finding of the monolith on the moon. When HAL questions the mission, and questions his crew. He makes a false report that their ship's antenna control system is failing. When the crew find that this is an error. It is the first time the HAL computer has ever made a mistake. When Dave and Frank are unsure of this situation they decide they sill shut HAL's higher brain functions disabled. HAL discovers their plans and when trying to reconnect the ship's antenna control system HAL kills Frank Poole. When Dave goes out in space to save his friend, HAL takes over the ship and refuses to let dave back into the ship. Dave has to then force his way in and try to destroy HAL.

When destroying HAL, when Dave is attempting to get rid of HAL a video recording then informs Bowman of the truth about the mission. When the ship discovers the final monolith and takes Dave into our final evolutionary state.



Now it tooks me a long while to understand this film. And the first time I saw it I had no idea what the movie was about. (Especially the last 20 minutes of the film). But after watching it a few times and studying the film you get more of what the film is potraying.

The film isn't entertaining really until you have studied it and watched it a few times. So newcomers to the movie may think i'm crazy on this review and say it ony desurves 2.5 to maybe 3.5 stars. Believe me this is what I thought at first.

But the beauty of this film is it allows you to make your own interpetations on what the film really means. For example I think it means we have gone from apes to evolved humans, the next step is beyond our comprehension, but we can still predict. And maybe we will become beings higher than God.

It all depends on how you look at it. And Kubrick and Clark did a marvelous job at keeping its true meaning open to debate.



Historically important work, and wonderful at that, 4.5/5 stars

Good reviews. Now if I only had a third thumb.

__________________
"This is that human freedom, which all boast that they possess, and which consists solely in the fact, that men are conscious of their own desire, but are ignorant of the causes whereby that desire has been determined." -Baruch Spinoza

thanks for another great review...

Thanks for the great review, 2001 is one that needed a few watchings, for me to really enjoy and appreciate.

Sleeper



I give it:

This film was sort of a beginning point for Woody Allen. But in my opinion, it's one of his most disappointing works. But as with all writer/directors, they all seem to have a "beginning point" and this was his before he created the wonderful Annie Hall.



This slapstick-science fiction-comedy is about Miles Monroe, (Woody Allen), who is frozen in the 1970's and thawed out by anti-government radicals 200 years later. Times have changed. And the world has become a more oppressive place. And they figure Miles is the key to overthrow the tyrannical government.

Well long short of it is the government is now after Miles and he finally meets up with a girl named Luna Schlosser, (Diane Keaton). The two don't hit it off right away, infact Luna hates him and is paranoid that Miles is going to kill her.
But after saving her life, they quickly become partners to overthrow the government. And silly slapstick happends along the way.



Now alot of people back this film and say it's funny regardless. But I sing a different tune when it comes to that issue. Like all classics, (this goes for all movies), they MUST stand the test of time. Sure slapstick is funny every now and then. But when it all comes down to it I could easily watch slapstick on "America's Funniest Home Videos". I much prefer witty-comedy over anything else. That stands the test of time more than anything else.

Woody Allen plays himself as always, that's not a bad thing. Infact some of his remarks in this movie made me laugh out loud. But this is definately not his best preformance.

The film goes here and there and never really focases on what any issue is. There is a slight romance between Miles and Luna. But the film is so clouded with other things going on it's almost as if Miles was proposing marriage to Luna at a heavy metal concert. The whole vibe is just hard to get over such commotion.

You can see how Allen and Keaton really hit it off in real life. They seem perfect for the roles they play, but again this film wasn't worth the play.

All writers/directors/actors have a start. And they are allowed to screw up. But as long as in the end they will eventually give us something rewarding, that's how i feel on the subject.



This film might be worth a glance, but my advise is to avoid it and go to some other form of Allen flick, 2.5/5 Stars.

Mystic River



I give it:

Mystic River was one of those movies I wish I could have loved more, but I just couldn't find myself liking it as much as I wanted to. But I shall explain why after the review.

It won at this years Oscars of 2004:

Best Actor: Sean Penn in Mystic River
Best Supporting Actor: Tim Robbins in Mystic River

And I think this is rightfully so. It's not the acting I have complaints with. The acting was wonderful. It's just the movie itself I had a hard time swallowing.



The story is about three childhood friends, (Jimmy, Sean, and David) who seemingly face one tragedy after another. When they grow older they are reunited again when Jimmy's daughter turns up dead. And a murder mystery opens up.

David was at the bar at the night she was murdered and returns home with a wound to the stomach and cut on the hand. And states he was mugged the night of the murder. And his wife helps heal his wounds.
After a few days of telling his wife the story, she becomes suspicious because there was no news of it in the papers and his story keeps changing all the while Jimmy's daughter is dead.

Jimmy is confused over his daughter's death and trys to come to terms with it, but can't seem to. He's unrested, and he wants to find the man who killed his daughter. And isn't sure the police are taking care of the matter. So he takes matters into his own hands and uses his posse, the Savage Brothers, to find the man who killed her.

Sean is a homicide detective who is on the case and is working out to find who Killed Jimmy's daughter. And begins questioning everyone involved and works extra hard just to help his friend.

The conclusion really is a test of friendship.



Now, this movie is VERY heavy. A little to heavy for my taste. Mystic River is like a dead movie. If that makes any sense. There was really no life to it at all. The whole movie starts out with a tragedy then it works it's way to anouther tragedy.

With the whole movie revolving around Jimmy's dead daughter. It's like the whole moive was just dancing from one scene to anouther with a corpse attached to it. Now I don't mind "murder-mystery" films. Hitchcock made many and those films where very good. But they still had "life" in them, which made them watchable.

The acting however was really good. Regardless of how much I struggled with the film. Tim Robbins and Sean Penn definately deserved their Oscars. Best acting of the the '04 year, but not of all time.

The ending I thought was the only decent thing about this film. Partly because it was finally putting the lid on this casket. This film didn't draw me in as much as I wanted to. And it made me foreshadow everything that came into play and I knew from the get go who was going to end up innocent and guilty. And some of the things in the movie I thought they could have done without. Like what the deal was with Sean's wife.



Mystic River is just one of those films where it leaves you feeling unsettled. 3/5 Stars.