Rodent's Reviews

[The Rodent]

Quick Roundup of the thread so far while I'm getting used to the new computer.
This copying and pasting malarky seems to be working though.

1- Young Guns
2- A Nightmare On Elm Street (2010 Remake)
3- 2012
4- Cowboys And Aliens
5- Cloverfield
6- Leon
7- Dreamcatcher
8- Alien 3 Definitive Version Vs Theatrical Release
9- The 'Burbs
10- Starship Troopers [11]

11- Predator
12- Robocop
13- John Carpenter's The Thing
14- Alien Vs Predator and Aliens Vs Predator Requiem
15- Terminator Foursome (1-4)
16- The Fourth Kind
17- Jurassic Park
18- Pirates Of The Caribbean Original Trilogy (1-3)
19- The Dark Crystal
20- Tremors [27]

21- Paul
22- Full Metal Jacket
23- Demolition Man
24- Dumb And Dumber
25- Ridley Scott's Robin Hood
26- Christopher Reeve Superman Foursome (1-4) And Superman Returns
27- Batman Begins
28- The Dark Knight
29- Ghostbusters
30- Star Wars Franchise (1-6) [46]

31- Critters
32- The Matrix Trilogy (1-3)
33- Arachnophobia
34- Super 8
35- The Shawshank Redemption
36- The Abyss
37- Troll Hunter
38- John Carpenter's The Fog
39- Dog Soldiers
40- The Shining [58]

41- Indiana Jones Foursome (1-4)
42- Robert Rodriguez' Predators
43- Sam Raimi's Spider Man Trilogy (1-3)
44- Rocky Franchise (1-6)
45- The Lost Boys
46- Evolution
47- Alien Foursome (1-4 Includes A Rerun Of Review #8)
48- Jurassic Park Trilogy (1-3 Includes A Rerun Of Review #17)
49- Gremlins Duo (1 & 2)
50- Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (Original Movie) [82]

51- 30 Days Of Night
52- From Dusk Till Dawn
53- I, Robot
54- Steven Spielberg's War Of The Worlds
55- Bladerunner
56- Armageddon
57- Signs
58- The Quick And The Dead
59- Ransom
60- The Big Lebowski [92]

61- Ghostbusters Duo (1 & 2 Includes A Rerun Of Review #29)
62- Pitch Black
63- The Day After Tomorrow
64- Independence Day
65- Cat's Eye
66- Equilibrium
67- Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes
68- The Karate Kid (Original Movie) [100]
69- Die Hard Franchise (1-4)
70- Poltergeist [105]

71- The Passion Of The Christ
72- Paranormal Activity
73- Paranormal Activity 2
74- Pulp Fiction
75- Critters Foursome (1-4 Includes A Rerun Of Review #31)
76- Unforgiven
77- Black Hawk Down
78- The Fly (1986 Remake)
79- Lake Placid
80- Back To The Future Trilogy (1-3) [119]

81- Lethal Weapon Foursome (1-4)
82- Star Trek Franchise (1-11)
83- Of Mice And Men
84- An American Werewolf In London
85- Predator 2 (Includes A Rerun of Reviews #11 & #42)
86- Jaws
87- American Pie Original Trilogy (1-3)
88- Godzilla
89- The Negotiator
90- The Green Mile [144]

91- The Mist
92- Silent Hill
93- Highlander
94- The Goonies
95- Batman
96- Batman Returns
97- I Am Legend
98- Titanic
99- Saving Private Ryan
100- Avatar [100th Review, 154th Movie]

101- The Simpsons Movie
102- District 9
103- Slither
104- Wanted
105- Casino
106- No Country For Old Men
107- Blown Away
108- The Cowboys
109- K-PAX
110- The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy (1-3) [166]

111- Edward Scissorhands
112- The Expendables
113- Little Shop
114- 3:10 To Yuma
115- Trainspotting

116- A Bug's Life (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon)
117- Cars (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon)
118- Monsters Inc. (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon)
119- WALL-E (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon)
120- The Incredibles (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon) [176]

121- Gladiator
122- The Dark Knight Rises (Includes A Rerun Of Reviews #27 & #28)
123- King Kong
124- Mortal Kombat
125- Appaloosa
126- Legend
127- Dead Calm
128- The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button
129- Top Gun
130- Mission: Impossible Foursome (1-4) [130th Review, 189 Movies In Total]

131- Twins
132- Pearl Harbor
133- Tremors Trilogy (1-3 Includes A Rerun Of Review #20)
134- Paulie
135- Hard Target
136- Universal Soldier
137- Sudden Death
138- Timecop
139- The Crow
140- American History X [200th Movie]

141- Gone Baby Gone
142- Waterworld
143- The Fifth Element
144- Cop Land
145- Mississippi Burning

146- Beverly Hills Cop Trilogy (1-3) (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review Marathon Of The 1980s Classics And Their Sequels)
147- Field Of Dreams (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review Marathon Of The 1980s Classics And Their Sequels)
148- Stand By Me (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review Marathon Of The 1980s Classics And Their Sequels)
149- Rain Man (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review Marathon Of The 1980s Classics And Their Sequels)
150- Big Trouble In Little China (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review Marathon Of The 1980s Classics And Their Sequels)

151- Who Framed Roger Rabbit? (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review Marathon Of The 1980s Classics And Their Sequels)
152- Innerspace (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review Marathon Of The 1980s Classics And Their Sequels)
153- Short Curcuit Duo (1 & 2) (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review Marathon Of The 1980s Classics And Their Sequels)
154- Commando (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review Marathon Of The 1980s Classics And Their Sequels)
155- Explorers (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review Marathon Of The 1980s Classics And Their Sequels)

156- The Untouchables (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review Marathon Of The 1980s Classics And Their Sequels)
157- Flight Of The Navigator (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review Marathon Of The 1980s Classics And Their Sequels)
158- Platoon (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review Marathon Of The 1980s Classics And Their Sequels)
159- Uncle Buck (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review Marathon Of The 1980s Classics And Their Sequels)
160- Weird Science (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review Marathon Of The 1980s Classics And Their Sequels)

161- The 40 Year Old Virgin [224th Movie]

[nebbit]

Wow :yup:

[The Rodent]

Just watching this on telly...

Review #162: The A-Team

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e8/A_team_poster_10.jpg


Colonel John Smith, Lieutenant Templeton Peck, Corporal Bosco Albert Baracus and Captain HM Murdock are one, well four, of a kind.
They're the best in the business when it comes to Military tactics and special missions due to their disparate personalities.
When the four are framed for a high profile crime they didn't commit, they go on an all out tactical fist fight against the people who framed them to clear their names and bring justice to those responsible...

... but along with the way, they will be tested physically and mentally to the extreme and will find out if they really are as good as they think they are as they become the heroes we all know and love...

... Hannibal, Face, Bad Attitude and Howlin' Mad. They are The A-Team.


It was very very hard to like this movie... it's taking something that's loved by near three generations of people and tweaking it to modern day and adding a hell of a lot of CGI and OTT action scenes that are so OTT, it rivals the radish shooting scaffolding poles that were used in the TV series.

The good points are the overall screenplay and general storyline. There was little for the writers to do really with the backstory being written years ago already, but with the tweaking and modernising added to the story gives a slightly different flavour to the proceedings.
For a start the movie isn't nostalgic... at all. What we have is a movie with the same character names and some actors who look a tiny bit like the originals.

The rest however is completely new... especially the way our four favourite heroes have been portrayed. If anything though, it actually works really really well as it is. It gives a fresh new start to the foursome and adds a nicely and simply rounded viewing of how they all got together and became the beloved A-Team.
Not all of it works though sadly, and it's hard to buy into such an already established series that's being remade.

What really works well with the new set up though is the humour and comedic elements to the script writing and overall dialogue. There are some one liners throughout that actually made me laugh out loud and other scenes of mild slapstick and action oriented humour that gave me more than a few smiles along the way.

One thing that didn't work though is how the team, particularly Hannibal, gets his info on the badguys... it seems to be a completely overlooked detail in the plot.


The acting is actually really well put together though.

Liam Neeson as Hannibal adds his own little spin on things yet remains strangely recognisable as the character we know.
Bradley Cooper as Face... he too adds his own touches and still remains recognisable as the Face we're all familiar with.

Quinton Jackson is a touch and go situation though. He feels wrong in the role to start with... but as the film progresses he actually grew on me and really showed his worth as our beloved BA Baracus. There is a faux philosophical side to him though that really doesn't suit the rewritten character. His knuckle tattoos are funny though.

The stand out role though is Sharlto Copley as Howlin Mad Murdock... his completely new take on the character, again mixed with new touches, gives the audience one of the best reimagined film characters I've seen in a long time.

Back up comes from Jessica Biel, Patrick Wilson, Brian Bloom, Gerald McRaney and... Dirk Benedict and Dwight Schultz show their support too.
Biel in particular is pretty good as a kind of frenemy to the boys.

All involved though are able to give apt performances when the going gets tough and some of the more sombre scenes and they all hold the comedy together really well too.
The main foursome in particular have massive chemistry too.


The action though is really what the movie stands for.
It's highly CG, full of explosive action, the likes of which I've never seen outside of a comicbook and has lashings of seriously cartoonish stunts and shoot'em ups. the good thing with the action though is that it starts out as it wants to go on... it's cartoony and OTT from the very start.
However, despite the nature of some of the action, it still holds well against the more serious take on the characters, the humorous nature of the script and the tweaked nature of the screenplay.

One thing missing from the action though is a genuine antagonist... the bad guys don't really give much of a threat to the heroes writing wise.


---


All in all... massively OTT action, a funny script/dialogue and a pretty well written story and screenplay... not all of it works and it's treading on hallowed ground with the overall premise but still, it's an entertaining actioner and holds up well against most other recent action-comedy films.
I found it hard to like at first but over the running time, it actually grew on me.

My rating: 82%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[Powderfinger]

Quick Roundup of the thread so far while I'm getting used to the new computer.
This copying and pasting malarky seems to be working though.


Are you still practicing your pool and snooker? If so, I reckon your not practicing enough..:D

[nebbit]

I quite liked the A Team, its not great but enjoyable :yup:

[Daniel M]

Yeh the A-Team is not a very good film in my opinion, but anyone expecting anything else from it was fooling themselves - it's a decent enjoyable film for what it intends to be and I certainly don't hate it.

[honeykid]

I liked it, but that final set piece is bloody awful. I hated it all from the docks till the end.

[The Rodent]

Yeah the ending was a bit hollow overall... it's very flashy and full of explosions but as I said, there's no real antagonist or genuine showdown... and BA's fight with one of the baddies was really disappointing too... other than that I liked most of it and was quite surpirsed with it.
Glad I waited for it to appear on telly though.

[The Rodent]

Bit of a random choice, fancied doing a 1997 clone war with this post...



Review #163: Dante's Peak

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/ce/Dantes_peak_ver2.jpg

Dr Harry Dalton and his crew of Geologists are sent to investigate Dante's Peak as there have been a few rumblings under the mountain.
Through a couple of near misses and some strange events with the Hot Springs around the area, Harry immediatelt sees that the mountain may explode, but his boss dismisses Harry, thinking he's being apranoid.
Sparking up a relationship with the town's Mayor, Rachel Wando, Harry expresses his concerns and the pair go on a two man battle to prepare the town for evacuation...

... but because of Harry's arrogant boss, they're too late.


Based on a real life scenario in Mount St Helens and Mount Pinatubo and giving only a few hints of artistic license, Dante's Peak gives the viewer a really well written screenpaly, some genuinely unsettling turns of events backed up by feelings of paranoia and some really fine acting.

What makes the movie stand out over Volcano is that the character writing gives a genuine edge to those involved and makes a really good connection to the viewer. Some of it is a bit cheesy and some of the dialogue is a bit mawkish but it's hardly recognisable.

The overall feel of the movie, especially with the science involved and the slow and brooding build up makes for a much more seriously toned film than Volcano was. There are a couple of real life based jokes and humour though.
The character writing, though relatively simplistic and containing little in the way of development, is still very recognisable and realistic in tone and gives a much more rounded feel to the acting involved.


The acting though is really good for a disaster movie.
Pierce Brosnan as Harry Dalton is extremely likeable and full of worldly wise charisma. He's also very engaging and has huge chemistry with on-screen lover Linda Hamilton.
Which brings me to Linda Hamilton as Mayor Wando. She too is extremely engaging and plays it very real throughout. If anything, she's probably the best thing on show with Brosnan a close second.

Back up comes from Charles Hallahan, Tzi Ma, Grant Hesslov and Elizabeth Hoffman.


One thing with the action and effects is that they're used sparingly and are based mainly around reality and it's not an overboard Hollywood CGI brightly coloured actioner like Volcano.... even so, it's still highly charged and exciting when the more action orientated scenes actually get going.
The choreography is also top notch.


---


All in all, based around reality with only a handful of more fantasical Hollywood stuff... the writing though is top drawer and the character-audience connection is really good too.
Not as much fun as Volcano, but the overall adventure beats it hands down in every other department.

My rating: 91%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)





Review #164: Volcano

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/dd/Volcano_%281997_film%29.jpg

After an Earthquake strikes LA, Mike Roark, the Head of LA's Office of Emergency Management is drawn into a series of terrifying events when it appears that molten lava is popping up all over the city. He must work with scientist Dr Amy Barnes and his co-worker and pal Emmit Reese to discover exactly what's going on and how to stop LA from turning itself inside out through natural disaster and public panic.


A pretty formulaic turn of events gives the viewer a series of exciting and adrenaline filled action sequences and at times a pretty dumbed down, almost kid friendly series of events that are a nod to the disaster movies of old.

The screenplay is also pretty simplistic. The 123 set of events and ABC series of set scenes and cod science is simply there to give the viewer a nicely simple backdrop for CGI and explosive lava filled action.

There is some character based drama throughout, particularly with the lead character and his daughter, but it's the usual mawkish "hate each other then suddenly love each other after the disaster" kind of Hollywood relationship writing.
Some of the dialogue is immensly cheesy though, especially when some of the action scenes get going.

Some of it is knowingly cheesy though and it gives a much more fun orientated feel to proceedings than Dante's Peak had.


The acting though is good. But as with Dante's Peak, there's a couple of massively known lead stars mixed with a more than a few not-so-famous faces.
Tommy Lee Jones as Mike Roark is the best on show gladly. His natural on screen presence and take charge attitude, especially when barking orders at people is always a pleasure and his torn feelings with his daughter are played well by Jones.
Anne Heche also makes a nice appearance as Dr Barnes. Her chemistry with anyone who is sharing the screenwith her is awesome and she plays the role of educated and skilled personality is well worth the money.

Gaby Hoffman as Jones' daughter Kelly is good too. She's not utilised a great deal until the third act but when she's on screen she never fails to impress.

Back up comes from Don Cheadle, Keith David and John Carroll Lynch.


The action though is really what all the budget is about. It's also extremely exciting, mainly through the mystery and build up which is then dropped for an all out and well rendered effects filled third act.
It's very well choreographed too and the actors involved give apt performances throughout the explosive events.
Some of the scenes of cheesy and tongue in cheek action can get a bit laughable at times though, especially as I said, the dialogue involved.


---


All in all, not as good as Dante's Peak in the plot/script writing and character writing departments, but is much more charged in terms of effects and action and the acting really is good for the simply written and action fuelled film it becomes.
It's also a lot more fun than Dante's Peak.

My rating: 84%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[Exist]

^ I really enjoyed The Burbs as a child, loved the way it zoom in from planet earth at the beginning.

[The Rodent]

Review #165: Hancock


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c9/Hancockposter.jpg


A Superhero called John Hancock is a serious loose wire. He pretty much has all the powers of Superman but has seemingly lost his way in life and prefers to drink himself unconcious and when he does actually get off his backside to help people, he causes more damage than the criminals and would probably be better staying asleep on the park bench.
The entire populous of the city, and probably the whole world, hate Hancock and his heavy handed, drunk, bad mouthed ways and wish him to simply disappear.

When he saves the life of Public Relations wizard Ray Embry (albeit while destroying several cars and a freight train in the process), Ray makes Hancock a promise... to get him off the booze, sort out his public image, and make him a Superhero that everyone will love.


Bit of an odd one this, what starts out as a promising movie with lots of laughs and some high octane comicbook action mixed with some bad language and an alcoholic immortal, turns very quickly into a story of cheesy morals and faux sentiment and an extremely dodgy love triangle.

The actual screenplay is tip top though, it's linear where it needs to be but adds a couple of little twists along the way to keep the audience fixed, but sadly that's about it. It plays out really well but the overall story and plot are what let it all down.

It becomes a very doughy and gooey love story with an apparent background based in fantasy and becomes just too rushed writing wise at the end to really capture the viewer's imagination. It's as though the writers couldn't think how to develope the third act so went for the Hollywood default setting of faux mushy sentiment and dodgy romance.

What I think let the film down more than anything else is that the studio cut and shred it after filming because originally it was rated 18... in Britain it's been shredded to the point that it's now a PG movie, meaning it's suitable for all ages in Britain. Bad form.

Another thing the film fails at, is character development. It tries hard to give a few changes throughout the film but they're just not believeable with the poor script writing.


The action is what the film really tries hard to deliver but it seems to have taken second place to the novelty of "let's see how much fun stuff a bad Superhero can get away with".
When it gets going though it's well choreographed and full of adrenaline and is really well put together in the computer... but there's no real antagonist for our Hero to get his teeth into (the only genuine antagonist is the story), which to me, is kinda the point of having a Superhero/Superhuman/Hancock style character in the first place.


The acting is definitely the best part of it all though, and even then it's not anything special.
Will Smith as Hancock is wonderfully grumpy and lost when it comes to being a nice guy for a change. He carries the badass side of the character really well too, especially when various crims p*ss him off. He's definitley the best on show.
Jason Bateman is ok as PR man Ray Embry. He seems to have a look on his face as to why he's in such a dodgy story to be honest but he plays the character well enough. There's not a great deal of humour written for Bateman though, which is sad as Bateman can be immensly funny when he's given the right material.

Charlize Theron as Bateman's disapproving wife Mary is ok too. She's a bit quiet at the start but is utilised toward the end quite nicely.

Back up comes from Eddie Marsan and Jae Head, and that's really about it.


---


All in all, no where near as good as it looked on the trailer and dumbed down in the editing room so kids can watch too. Smith is about the best thing on show... with the CGI coming in second. The rest is a miss on almost every level.
Funny and novel at the start, Hollywood cheesy and boring at the end.

My rating: 54%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleR5050StampNew_zps36b9d868.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleR5050StampNew_zps36b9d868.png.html)

[mastermetal777]

I actually really liked Hancock just for the different take on the whole superhero story. Yeah, it does get cheesy at the end, but I actually like a little cheese in any movie. I was very entertained by the film.

[JayDee]

Just been catching up on your reviews Rodent, had somehow fallen way behind.

Anyway Hancock was decent-ish but its tone just felt all over the place - sometimes like a standard superhero flick, sometimes quite dark, sometimes stupid and cheesy etc. I've not seen either Dante's Peak or Volcano for years, but I remember enjoying Dante's but hating Volcano. A-Team was alright but hoped it would be a lot better. Out of interest has anyone seen The Losers? A very similar film which came out at the same time. I picked the DVD up a while back cheap but still to watch it.

[The Rodent]

Yeah The Losers is a bit poop really. Not a fan of any of the cast tbh except Zoe Saldana... even then though she wasn't great in that film.
Can't stand Chris Evans either. His take on the Captain America character wasn't too bad but the rest of his stuff has been annoying at best, especially Fantastic Four.

[Daniel M]

Agree with pretty much your entire post on Hancock, the film was okay up until the last act which I thought was just really really bad.

[The Rodent]

As promised in the shoutbox last night...

Review #166: True Grit Vs True Grit


True Grit 1969

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a5/Truegritposter.jpg

Matty Ross is a little girl with a big problem, a man called Lucky Ned Pepper murdered her father and Matty wants revenge. The able and intelligent 14 year old girl travels to Fort Smith in the hopes that she will find help in tracking and killing her father's killer.
She meets with a self promoting Texas Ranger called La Boeuf who has tracked Ned Pepper for a while but they can't come to an agreement over Matty's bounty proposal...

... however drunk and grumpy US Marshall Reuben "Rooster" J Cogburn is rumoured to be the best choice for her mission, and after a meeting with him he reluctantly agrees to her terms...

... but the grumpy Rooster didn't count on the 14 year old child and the Texas Ranger wanting to tag along through the Big Country on the pursuit... and along the way they find that they all have True Grit.


The whole movie from start to end captures the imagination and is laden with some of the funniest real life dialogue and realistic script writing I've yet to see in a Western.
The overall story isn't slacking either, the basic well used plot of revenge is given a new leese of life with the fantastic screenplay and script.

The actual premise of the film could have been very easy to get wrong though. The overall plot could have turned quite sappy and mawkish and could even have just been another Western with pointless shootouts... but it's the above mentioned that really make the film as good as it is.
There are one or two scenes that don't quite work as well as the others, but the movie's failings are very few and very far between, it's that well written.


One of John Wayne's most famous roles and certainly one of his best as Rooster. Wayne's natural ability and, well, X-Factor to make the audience fall in love with him that makes the role so special. He carries the grumpy characteristics well, as always with Wayne, but it's his talent for humour that lifts the character to better heights than any of his others.

Kim Darby as Matty Ross stands out too. Being up against Wayne couldn't have been easy but there's such a massive chemistry between the pair, it's hard not to notice the young actress. Her intelligence as an actress also shines through in the intelligence of the character. She's real, incredibly detailed and holds her own in the series of uncomfortable events and still occasionally shows an incredibly vulnerable side when it becomes a bit too Wild in the West.

Glenn Campbell and Robert Duvall make good shows as La Boeuf and Ned Pepper respectively. They aren't given a massive amount of screentime or dialogue as our main two heroes but when on screen they impress.

Back up comes from Jeremy Slater, Strother Martin and the late great Dennis Hopper.
Jeff Corey makes an appearance as Chaney, Matty's father's killer.


The action is pretty good. There's a few gunfights and some of ther usual 1960s shootouts between the various factions and they're all well choreographed and exciting... a lot of the hits of action actually come from Matty Ross and her unbending ability to get into trouble and somehow get herself out of it too.
There's more than a few scenes of Matty out of her depth in the Big Country that never fail to impress.


---


All in all, there's a couple of miss hits along the running time, but for a 1960s John Wayne Western, True Grit is by far one of, or even the best.
Simply from the fact that it isn't a typical Western. Well acted, well shot, well choreographed, hard hitting at times and wonderfully funny when it needs to be.

My rating: 96%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)



---

True Grit 2010

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/ce/True_Grit_Poster.jpg

Matty Ross is a little girl with a big problem, a man called Lucky Ned Pepper murdered her father and Matty wants revenge. The able and intelligent 14 year old girl travels to Fort Smith in the hopes that she will find help in tracking and killing her father's killer.
She meets with a self promoting Texas Ranger called La Boeuf who has tracked Ned Pepper for a while but they can't come to an agreement over Matty's bounty proposal...


... however drunk and grumpy US Marshall Reuben "Rooster" J Cogburn is rumoured to be the best choice for her mission, and after a meeting with him he reluctantly agrees to her terms...


... but the grumpy Rooster didn't count on the 14 year old child and the Texas Ranger wanting to tag along through the Big Country on the pursuit... and along the way they find that they all have True Grit.


With this outing, the Coen Brothers have almost rewritten the movie and have still managed to make an almost scene for scene remake.
The script/story writing hasn't been changed a great deal, nor abviously has the plot but what has been changed is some of the humour and dialogue, and most certainly the overall look of the setting. It's much more realistic in tone as well, especially with the last few scenes of the film.
There's not much else really to say that already hasn't been said about the original film. The Coen Brothers have managed to remake and keep loyal basically.


What makes this version stand out from the original is by far the acting involved. Everyone involved gives more than 100% and the chemistry throughout is awesome.
Jeff Bridges has managed the impossible by actually making Wayne's character of Rooster a more likeable and much more approachable character. His overall persona is also much more engaging and he plays off his screen partners fantastically too, especially when arguing.
Matt Damon also has more to do in this one than Glenn Campbell as self promoter and overly confident La Boeuf. Damon is almost playing against type with the role but hits the nail on the head.

Barry Pepper also has a bit more to do as well as Ned Pepper. Out of all the bad guys, Pepper actually stands out more and is almost unrecongisable in the role. He too is playing against type.

Josh Brolin makes an appearnace as Chaney, but he, like Jeff Corey isn't given a massive amount to do.

The stand out role by far though is Haille Steinfeld as Matty Ross. Her take on the role is by far one of the most inspirational turns of acting I've seen in a long time. Her realistic and intelligent persona works brilliantly with the subject matters at hand and she's able to almost knock every other actor involved off their feet. By far the best on show.


The action in this one is much more realistic too. There's much more of a held back tone with the shootouts and action but when they get going they're well choerographed and certainly exciting... mostly down to the wonderful connection the audience has to the brilliantly acted characters who are involved in the hails of bullets.


---


All in all, I was dubious about remaking True Grit but seeing the film and seeing how loyal it is to the original and also how much a few changes can actually enhance such a wonderful story, I'm happy to say that it holds well against Wayne's most famous role.
Overall it's much funnier in places and the acting and changed dialogue outweighs the 1969 version, what let's it down though is that it is a remake.

My rating: 96%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[donniedarko]

I agree with you that the new True Grit awesome and Hancock is meh, but 91% for Dante's Peak? That movie sucked! The cheesiest film I've ever seen, especially dialouge and acting wise.

[The Rodent]

I found Dante's Peak to be quite an entertaining movie that had a lot of realistic stuff going on. Yeah there was some cheesy dialogue but I found it to be a well made film.

[Powderfinger]

I found Dante's Peak cheesy dialogue

:p

[honeykid]

I quite like Dante's Peak. It's a proper disaster film. Didn't care for Volcano.

[Daniel M]

Loving the True Grit comparison post there, I love the new True Grit and really do think it's one of the best examples of fabulous film making in recent years. Whilst it's not the most thrilling and is a relatively linear story it is just great from the Coens with like you said Bridges but more impressively Hailee Steinfeld give great performances.

I actually started watching the original and was really looking forward to it but for some reason I had to stop and couldn't record it which was pretty annoying, need to get round to a proper viewing some time.

[The Rodent]

Even though I gave the same percentage, I'd recommend the original over the remake on a personal/emotional basis, I just found it more enjoyable.
The remake, even though it's a really good movie, it suffers from what it is... a remake.

[mastermetal777]

I actually found the remake a bit better than the original. John Wayne kinda brings it down for me. Don't get me wrong, the man was a screen legend, but nobody ever really sees a film for Wayne to play a good role. People watch him to play John Wayne. Jeff Bridges completely transformed into Cogburn, and it was a terrific performance. Hailey Steinfeld was also a better point for me cuz of how she portrayed Maddie. I also prefer the grittier version that the Coens portrayed of the story then the more lighthearted version of the John Wayne version. I don't think it suffers from "remake syndrome" like most other films. This one was a damn fine remake in my eyes.

[The Rodent]

I see your point about Wayne, he's kinda just, well, Wayne... but I think that's what makes the movie work.
I rated them the same based on what the original lacks (acting and grittiness), the remake makes up for...

... but what the remake lacks (originality and imagination rather than Remake Syndrome), is made up for with the original... they're on a very even keel with my percentages ratings, but personally, I prefer the original.

[The Rodent]

Review #167: Watchmen


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bc/Watchmen_film_poster.jpg


In an alternate 1938, a group of costumed Superheroes appear. Over the years America wins Vietnam, the crisis between America and the Ruskies is in favour of the Americans and thanks to a particular all powerful Superhero, President Nixon is reelected all the way to 1985.
Eventually though, Superheroes and masked vigilantes are outlawed... causing them to go into hiding and lead normal, humdrum lives.

When one of these hiding heroes is murdered in more than odd circumstances, a brutally violent vigilante who refuses to go into hiding called Rorschach, investigates the murder and uncovers something much more disturbing in the process...

... and he must call upon the remaining hiding heroes to help stop a fate that could end in the deaths of billions.


Another slightly odd movie for my thread, Watchmen is a Superhero movie with a difference.
For a start, it doesn't shy away from stylish violence, blood, gore, sexual violence and sheer outright action.
It's also extremely creative and original in the writing and plot departments.

It's certainly not the average Superhero movie in terms of look and set-style either. It's dark, brooding and filed with some great sets and backdrops for the heroes.
Then there's the more fantastical side of things. It's highly comicbook with some of the violence and some of the little gadgets and items that the heroes use, which gives even more variety to the movie compared to other comicbook movies.

One very special thing about the screenplay and plot is the history that it builds during the running time. It adds much more depth to the story that many other films, of any kind, really lack.


The acting is also top notch.
Patrick Wilson is an amazingly normal guy who becomes something different when he gets the suit on. He's a hero with a difference and doesn't fail to capture the audience.
Malin Ackerman also impresses as the sexy Silk Spectre 2. She has an other-worldly quality about her that's rare in Supergirls.

Jackie Earl Hallie as Rorschach isn't actually seen a great deal during the running time but makes a massive impression when he pops up from time to time. His natural onscreen presence is simply awe inspiring.

Billy Crudup as Dr Manhattan is the standout role though. Again, he's not on screen a massive amount but the effects that were smothered onto Crudup's brilliant performance are another essence of originality that makes him shine over all the other heroes. He's also pretty spooky in a calm kinda way.

Backing up the ensemble cast are Jeffrey Dean Morgan, Carla Gugino and Matthew Goode.


The action is also utilised well. It's used to enhance the story really, rather than just pointless fisty-cuffs and bashing pointless heads together. Rorschach in prison is a highlight too.
Even so, it's stylish, doesn't hold back with the blood and teeth and is extremely well choreographed.
Even with some of the more fantastical battles and effects used with Dr Manhattan, they're believeable.


---


All in all, next to Nolan's Batman, it's close to being one of the best hero type films. Hard to get into to start with due to not being a 'regular' Superhero movie, but give it a go, it's simply a lot of fun with flashy effects backed up by a fantastically original story.
Being totally honest, it's that good I'm kicking myself for not putting it into my Top 100.

My rating: 94%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[JayDee]

I'll need to watch Watchmen again at some point. Enjoyed it but I think I struggled with my expectations built up from the incredible graphic novel.

Favourite part was definitely the incredible opening credits montage set to Bob Dylan's "The Times They Are A-Changing"

Being totally honest, it's that good I'm kicking myself for not putting it into my Top 100.


Wow really, that's very high praise for it.

[The Rodent]

I'd have it around the 70 mark tbh. It's pretty good... watching it right now on telly lol!
It'd knock Star Wars 3 off my list, that's for sure.

[TylerDurden99]

Hate Watchmen. It's a solid film, but when compared to it's source material (which I do, whether I like it or not), it's a mess. It leaves out too much of the political context and it misses out too much of the subplots present in the graphic novel.

It was just "unfilmable" to begin with.

[HonestMovieReviews]

Bit of a random choice, fancied doing a 1997 clone war with this post...



Review #163: Dante's Peak

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/ce/Dantes_peak_ver2.jpg

http://1.2.3.11/bmi/1.2.3.10/bmi/1.2.3.11/bmi/1.2.3.9/bmi/i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/RodentSupermanRecommendedBMP.jpg

I couldn't tell you which scene or at what time, but this is the only movie where I could clearly see 2 stunt people driving the truck instead of the actors.

[mastermetal777]

I loved Watchmen. I've read some of the graphic novel, and while I admit the film left out a lot, here are a few things I have to say regarding the differences:

- the dialogue had to be different. Writing for a comic book and writing for a film are completely different and has to appeal to the audience of each medium.

- A true-to-form movie version of Watchmen with all exposition and additional content would honestly run at least 4 to 5 hours. Nobody's gonna watch that long of a film.

- I heard people complaining about the squid scene in the graphic not being in the film. That scene was not important to the plot of the novel, in my opinion, so I'm glad they left it out. The only downside for me: the soundtrack. It's a great soundtrack with great songs in it...but not for a superhero film, honestly. It just doesn't sit right with me.

Other than that, it's a great film. I watch it repeatedly whenever I can just because of the unique take on the superhero genre it has. My rating for the film: 4.5 out of 5 stars, if only for the less-than-suiting soundtrack.

[honeykid]

A true-to-form movie version of Watchmen with all exposition and additional content would honestly run at least 4 to 5 hours. Nobody's gonna watch that long of a film.


Sure they would. The truth is that they wouldn't risk their money making it, as it's unlikely to return a profit.

[Gabrielle947]

I love Watchmen and it may lack the superhero movie spirit but that's what makes it so memorable.Both times I saw the final cut which includes "Black Freighter" story but I'm not sure that this is the best cut,movie becomes even more depressive with that story.The funeral scene when "The Sound of Silence"(all music is great in this film) is playing is one of my most favorite scenes of all time.It's gorgeous.
However,as it was mentioned it also think that it's a bit of a mess,so I would give it a 8/10.But subjectively,after Dark Knight,it's my favorite super-hero film.

[The Rodent]

Ok, has to be done now I have them both on DVD... A rerun of Review #13: John Carpenter's The Thing, and the prequel from 2011.
I've made a couple of additions and edited Review 13 slightly, but haven't removed anything

Review #168: John Carpenter's The Thing And The Thing


John Carpenter's The Thing

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c1/ThingPoster.jpg

The movie is based in the Antarctic, a group of scientists find themselves completely snowed in and cut off from the outside world during a heavy storm.
Norwegian scientists from another nearby science base and a husky sled dog all appear at their camp in less than comfortable circumstances, the group are then forced to defend themselves from the two unstable, trigger-happy Norwegians.
Upon checking out the Norwegian base to find out what happened, they find a scene of horror and torture and decide to bring back a terribly mutilated and inhuman corpse to their own camp for analysis...

... then the nightmare that overtook the Norwegian base becomes increasingly realised to the American scientists, as they are plunged into a world of pain, paranoia, sheer horror and a fight for survival against an enemy that can hide in plain sight.


Said by many to be a remake of the 1951 movie "The Thing From Another World", Carpenter's movie is simply based on the same novel "Who Goes There?" by John W Campbell.
The Thing is a closer take on the novel than the 1951 movie, which featured a 'man in suit' monster that resembled more of a giant vegetable crossed with Frankenstein’s monster.

Carpenter's masterpiece is a joy to behold. The tension of the cramped base corridors makes the feeling of being watched all the more potent and the paranoia between the characters can be felt by the viewer, right down to the toes.
There's also fantastic exposition, especially with the use of flashbacks seen on video recordings made by the Nords. It adds an element of untold mystery to the proceedings and gives the events much more depth and realism.


The movie's special effects are absolutely top notch, the collaboration between Rob Bottin and Stan Winston is very, very special.
Utilising animatronics, hand puppets and the very occasional ‘man in suit’ costume, the movie excels at putting the audience on the backfoot.
Only one, partially fake special effect is used in the entire movie in the form of a matt painting combined with Bottin's awesome mechanical effects, the rest is practical, real, juicy and extremely well modelled by the two effects geniuses.

The other thing with the effects and action is that they're used when needed.


The acting is also spot on. Kurt Russell, who is mediocre at the best of times, is wonderfully 'take charge' and tough when needed, his brooding take on the strange sequence of events works brilliantly.

Star turns from Wilford A Brimley, Keith David, Richard Masur and Donald Moffet make the characters work even better, these guys really hit their roles with perfection.
Keith David in particular plays with the audience's paranoia too with his more highly wound temperament.


Mix all that with Carpenter’s spooky, low tone soundtrack (a soundtrack that beats all of his others hands down) makes this another must see movie from me, especially before the ‘prequel’ (based at the Norwegian camp) is released this year.


---


All in all, one of the finest creature features ever made and one the finest horror stories put to screen. It plays not only with script devices but also with the audience expectations and gives frights, thrills, spills and sheer paranoia in bucket loads.

My rating: 95%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)



-----


The Thing

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/65/Thingprequelfairuse.jpg

Set just days before Carpenter's Masterpiece, The Thing follows the exploits of the Norwegian camp a few miles away from Outpost 31.
The team of Nords and a handful of Americans discover what appears to be a crashed ship buried under 100,000 year old ice and nearby, an unidentifiable body too.
Digging up the body, they cart it back to base and try to take a skin sample...

... unwittingly though, they awaken the sleeping creature and all hell breaks loose and the team find themselves facing days of paranoia, fear, gore, horror and grand adventure as they become the first humans to come face to, erm, faces, with The Thing.


What could have been a fantastic build up and a mystery solver for fans of the original, sadly is just an excuse for CG gore, CG violence, CG fire, and CG monsters tearing people apart left right and center.

The movie does however excel in the paranoia stakes. The feelings of distrust in the main group are felt really very well and are an exceptionally good throwback to the original movie. However the well pieced together paranoia is thrown quickly to one side and forgotten about in favour of all out action and gore.


The rest of the film however, is simply badly written and tends rather to go for gory shocks and very little in the way of actual exposition in the storytelling. The main fault is the head cast member, Mary Elizabeth Winstead, automatically knowing exactly what the creature is before it's really even begun to do anything... and most of her explanatory dialogue has been lifted directly from the original film.

Now, ok, anyone watching will know, but surely there should maybe be something new added to the mix... or even some sort of discovery for the characters to go through. Sadly though, it's all explained so unbelieveably quickly by a character that has no knowledge of such a creature until now, that it reminded me of the badly written script of the A Nightmare On Elm Street remake.

Along with Winstead's lifted dialogue from the original movie, there are even a number of scenes that directly mirror the original, just to add that air of authentic-lack-of-imagination.

There's a few little hints of continuity though. Especially with some of the creature remains that are found in the original film but there are also however, some gaping continuity plotholes.


The acting is about the best part of the whole thing.
Mary Elizabeth Winstead does her best. She holds the poor script together really very well and carries the tension of the quieter scenes well too.
Joel Edgerton is also on form. Not top form, but he's there, and does a decent job.

Backup comes from Eric Christian Olsen, Ulrich Thomsen, Adewlae Akinnuoye-Agbaje and Jorgen Langhelle makes a likeable and memorable Norwegian.


The action and effects are really what the movie uses more than anything else and sadly, as I said, is mainly CG with only the odd hint of real puppetry and man-in-suit technology.
It's well rendered and highly glossy and flashy... but sadly, the lack of slime and snot gives the film a disappointing finish in terms of the fright factor.
It's just too fake really for The Thing.

The original soundtrack is used though, which gives a nice touch to proceedings.


---


All in all... a faux nostalgic film that falls flat on more than several occasions.
It's enjoyable as it is, but having it tied into the original film so tightly and yet also so loosely (because of the plotholes), it makes the whole thing feel like a remake rather than the loyal prequel it's desperately trying to be.
Would I recommend it though? Actually, only for one maybe two viewings.

My rating: 42%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[Godoggo]

Yeah, there was really no reason for that prequel. It was just a rehash of the far superior original.

[The Rodent]

It would and could and really should have been a lot better. I mean, if they'd have kept to the plot rather than just being a slasher movie, it could have been awesome. There definitely a story there... they just didn't utilise it very well.

[Godoggo]

Yes, pretty disappointing. I was really excited to see it too. I agree that something could have been done that was pretty special, but it ended up more like a poor remake than a prequel. _

[The Rodent]

Ok... it's on telly at the minute so I'm in the mood for a Christmas Movie Marathon...

... 5 movies, based in, around, and on, Christmas.


Part Of Rodent's 5 Christmas Movie Marathon

Review #169 (1st Of 5): Scrooged

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a1/Scrooged_film_poster.JPG


Frank Cross is an incredibly rich and powerful TV Executive... over the years he's become a very grumpy, downbeat and hard faced man and has sacrificed all his relationships with loved ones for his career.
In essence, he's become a bit of a Scrooge.

One Christmas though, while organising his TV Channel to show A Christmas Carol, he's visited by an old friend...


Taking a well known story and tweaking it to a twisted and still recognisable fable, Richard Donner and his team have hit on a very special comedy filled with zany characters and even zanier comedy rather than Dickens' dark, downbeat and eventually uplifting story.

There are some scenes of extremely dark comedy involved throughout too which are a throwback to the original story but with the backdrop of modern money and modern greed really gives a fresh outlook on Dickens' famous tale.

Along with the dark comedy storyline and screenplay there are also some really very well pieced together and genuinely emotional scenes. Some of the scenes contain hints of dark humour and surreal visuals too and the effects involved, when they're used are top notch.

What makes the film work fantastically though, is that it also manages to capture a Christmassy feel which is missing from many other surreal/twisted Christmas dark comedies.


The acting is also great.
Once again, Bill Murray is at his best as Cross (cross, Scrooge... geddit?)... Murray's natural talent at being absolutely anything he wants to be is perfect for the role of slimeball turned nice and even when he's being nasty, he's funny.
Karen Allen is also at her best as Murray's love interest. She's not seen a great deal but it's one of her best roles outside of Starman as a loveable and homely love interest for the hero.

Back up comes from Bobcat Goldthwait, Robert Mitchum, Brian Doyle Murray, John Murray and the brilliant John Glover.

The Ghosts of Christmas Past, Present and Future are also a wonder to watch.


---


All in all, dark tales of twisted morals and a pretty good comedy to boot, Murray is on top as usual and there's even a showing from Tiny Tim.
Lots of fun visually too, even with the surreal stuff... and somehow is able to give a heartwarming ending to such a funny build up.
A modern fairytale.

My rating: 93%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[The Rodent]

Part Of Rodent's 5 Christmas Movie Marathon

Review #170 (2nd Of 5): Bad Santa

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cc/Bad_Santa_film.jpg


Willie is a Santa Claus actor. Every year he dons the red suit and brings joy and wonder to countless kids at local malls.
But Willie and his Elf, Marcus, have a secret. They rob the most successful store in whatever mall they happen to be working in that year. Willie himself is an extraordinary safe cracker too.

Willie has another vice as well, he’s an extreme alcoholic and has little respect for authority and tends to get extremely depressed during the festive season.
This year however, Willie and Marcus will have their friendship tested, their skills as cat-burglars put under scrutiny and Willie will have his morals questioned when The Kid comes into his life, along with a possible girlfriend.


Now, pay little attention to the trailers for this movie… it’s not average humour and certainly isn’t the zany comedy that the trailers made it out to be.
Bad Santa is a highly adult comedy, filled with all the stereotypical characteristics of the alcoholic Santa and lots and lots of bad language, incredibly funny one liners, even funnier slapstick and is packed with some insane and irregular plot devices.

One thing that lets the film down though is that the second half of the second act and first half of the third, is all a bit sappy and full of humane and mawkish moral devices and emotional scenes. It works to an extent but does feel a bit out of place with what was going on beforehand. After that though, the rest of the third act returns to the usual loud and offensive comedy that made the first half so funny and turns the volume up to 11 again as well.

The screenplay does get a little lost though from time to time which is probably down to the almost experimental nature of the story and plot… still though, it’s easy enough to follow.


There’s not a massive amount of action as such, but there is a few hits of slapstick style comedy and the occasional hint of gunplay when the duo get themselves in trouble.


Billy Bob Thornton absolutely shines as Willie/Santa though. If anything, it’s one of Thornton’s best roles. His natural talent for taking what was already a funny script and turning it into something even more cutting is perfect for the role.
Tony Cox also plays well with the script. You get the impression that he and Thornton had an absolute ball while filming too. Their chemistry is awesome and Cox really makes an impression.
Brett Kelley also hits the viewer brilliantly as the dippy, quiet and loveable Kid. It’s also one the most original characters I’ve seen in a long time.

Back up comes from Lauren Graham, Lauren Tom, the late Bernie Mac… and the late and very great John Ritter.
All make impressions on the viewer too, especially Lauren Graham. She’s quite a surprise at how well she holds the film together as almost the voice of reason and the everyman of the cast.


---


All in all, not a perfect comedy but is certainly funny when Thornton gets going. It’s also a very acquired taste with some of the scenes and language on display.
Still though, I enjoyed it and would recommend it for anyone who's after a different kind of Christmas Comedy.

My rating: 83%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[cinemaafficionado]

My kind of adult comedy:p

[Daniel M]

I love Bad Santa, not a traditional family Christmas film but I really enjoyed it and found it funny :D

[Daniel M]

Sorry for the double post but I forgot to mention before and if I edit the post you might miss it. But I finally got round to watching the original version of True Grit and I kind of agree with what you said, it's enjoyable because it's more colourful and charming as you'd expect from a John Wayne film, just seemed a lot less realistic and a whole lot more jolly to me where as the newer version is gritter, more realistic and the characters much more interesting for me, so I'd give it the nod over the original, both are great though.

[JayDee]

Out of interest how are you choosing your 5 Christmas flicks Rodent? Are you going with films you like or is it just whatever happens to be on TV?

[The Rodent]

I got the idea because Scrooged was on telly but I'm going with my current faves... I've got two more lined up for definite but not sure what my last one will be.

Glad you liked the original True Grit Daniel... really good Wayne film. Def my favourite of his.

[The Rodent]

Part Of Rodent's 5 Christmas Movie Marathon


Review #171 (3rd Of 5): Home Alone

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/47/Home_alone.jpg


One Christmas, while they're all gathering ready to go on holiday in the morning, 8 year old Kevin and the rest of his family come to loggerheads, and Kevin is banished to the third floor bedroom as a bedtime punishment... and in his anger, he makes a wish that they'd all just disappear. He's bullied by his older siblings and feels he is put on by his parents and never listened to...

... and the whole family sleeps in the following day, so they panic and rush out to catch their airplane to their holiday destination... forgetting that Kevin was in the third floor bedroom.

Kevin wakes up to find the house deserted and at first thinks it's a joke but realises his wish came true, they all disappeared... but danger lurks around the corner as Kevin realises that two burglars are eyeing up the empty houses on his block and his home is next.
It's time for Kev to pull himself out from hiding under the bed...

... and become the man of the house.


What an incredibly OTT and original movie.
I remember watching the movie as a kid and thinking it was one of the best things I'd ever seen.
Watching it these days though, it has aged slightly, and isn't quite as funny as it was when I was 8 years old...

... still though, it's a thoroughly entertaining romp about life lessons, cartoonish stunts, lots of slapstick and some really very subtle adult humour and cleverly put together comedy on behalf of some of the adult cast.

The screenplay is also wonderfully pieced together. The premise of leaving a child behind might seem completely impossible but the way the movie delivers the plot and screenplay makes it actually work brilliantly.

There are some cheesie and doughy scenes toward the end after the main actiony scenes but they're kept to a minimum.
Still though, the movie is actually really well balanced in terms of tone from one scene to the next.


The acting is really good as well.
Macaulay Culkin as Kevin... now, not only is this the film that catapulted Culkin into the limelight, it's also his best role to date. He's funny, carries the more perilous scenes well and seems to have had a great time during production.
Joe Pesci is a real surprise though... his comedic timing is perfect and really shines as the leader of the two baddies. Some of his one liners are hilarious too.

Daniel Stern is the stand out role for me though as Pesci's partner. He's immensly funny and gives the impression that every take was different. The guy really stands out among the main cast.

Back up comes from Roberts Blossom, Catherine O'Hara, John Heard, Devin Ratray and a very young Kieran Culkin (brother of Macaulay).


The action and slapstick scenes though are what the movie really makes the most of.
They're highly inventive, incredible cringeworthy (in a good way) and are full of gratuitously painful and sadistic humour.
It's also highly comicbook as well though the film doesn't try to be serious with it all, which makes it work even better.


---


All in all, an absolute Christmas classic... even though it's not really a 'Festive' movie exactly.
Not as funny as I remember it being and will appeal to younger kids more, but it's still capable of raising a few smiles in an older audience with the playful element of the humour and occasional doughy scene at the end.

My rating: 87%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[Daniel M]

Home Alone like you said is not strictly a festive film, but it's definitely something that you have to watch around the Christmas period, the same can be said I suppose of The Wizard of Oz which I watch without fail every year.

Glad you liked the original True Grit Daniel... really good Wayne film. Def my favourite of his.

I wouldn't say that it's my favourite of his, he's very good but his more serious role in The Searchers is brilliant then there's my personal favourite Rio Bravo which I think is a brilliant film, one of my favourite Westerns that has a pretty feel good film, I think you might like it.

[The Rodent]

I've seen both of them. Decent movies... it's an odd one really, Wayne is a Marmite thing, you either love him or hate him... I find his movies watchable but I'm not a huge fane.
True Grit is one of the few of his I could watch over and over. The rest don't really have much appeal to me.

My Dad is a massive fan though.

[Daniel M]

I've seen both of them. Decent movies... it's an odd one really, Wayne is a Marmite thing, you either love him or hate him... I find his movies watchable but I'm not a huge fane.
True Grit is one of the few of his I could watch over and over. The rest don't really have much appeal to me.

My Dad is a massive fan though.

Fair enough, I'm a massive fan of Westerns - I'd maybe put OUATIWT, Dollars Trilogy, Unforgiven, Searchers, Rio Bravo etc. in at least my top 50 - so I think that greatly affects my opinion of him, in terms of enjoyment though I ended up loving Rio Bravo more than I thought I would, I don't know what it is about it I just thought it all came together incredibly well.

[JayDee]

Ah Home Alone, now there's a Christmas film! :yup: My absolute favourite. Seen it countless times since I was a kid but still get a kick out of it everytime I watch it. And I agree that Pesci and Stern put in great performances.

[The Rodent]

Part Of Rodent's 5 Christmas Movie Marathon


Review #172 (4th Of 5): Elf

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/df/Elf_movie.jpg


Buddy is an elf with a difference. When he was a baby, he crawled into Santa's toy sack and was taken to the North Pole by mistake. Not knowing where Buddy came from, Santa leaves the baby in the capable hands of Papa Elf.
Raised as an Elf, buddy is slow compared to real Elves and struggles with life but never gives up and has the spirit and tenacity of the Elf way.

When he's told about his past, Buddy heads to New York to find his real family... cue lots of fish out of water comedy and life lessons for everyone who comes into contact with him.


What an incredibly heart warming and funny tale. Elf delivers almost every type of humour, even crude humour in bucketloads and yet manages to stay kid friendly at the same time.

What makes the movie special is the sheer shamelessness of the writing. It's highly fantasy to start with, and then delivers some really touching, knowingly sappy and mawkish plot elements and laces the whole thing with immensly funny slapstick, one liners, fish out of water misunderstandings and some really lovely set pieces too.
The writers seemed to have captured a genuinely olde world apple pie style of mawkishness too which gives a lovely air of originality as well.

There are a couple of faults. Particularly the sappy elements of the film, which sounds like a contradiction from me but... some of the sappy plot points don't work brilliantly and feel a bit forced from time to time.
Still though, the ones that do work, work wonderfully.


The acting is fantastic.
Will Ferrell, in his best role by far outside of Ron Burgundy, is the perfect man for the job. His natural ability to play dumb yet brilliantly in his own world is a wonder to watch.
James Caan is also a perfect choice for Ferrell's real father. His stoney faced Scrooge is played off of Will fantastically.

Zooey Deschandel is also great as Ferrell's love interest. She's more of a everyman for the story but carries the humour and sappy tones really well.

Back up comes from Mary Steenburgen, Daniel Tay, Bob Newhart and... Ed Asner plays a brilliant Santa Claus.


There's also a nice hit of action and peril at the end too when Santa crashes in Central Park.
It adds a nice lift at the end and gives something more exciting for the viewer too.


---


All in all, it's hard to believe it's been almost 10 years since Elf was released, but it's an absolute must see Christmas movie.
It hit that mark almost immediately too, it's that well made.
A Modern Classic.

My rating: 91%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[JayDee]

Was wondering/hoping if Elf would be one of those you would choose. By far my favourite Christmas film of the 21st century. Though that's perhaps not saying much considering some of the dross that's been around - Four Christmases, Fred Claus etc

Do you already know the fifth film you're going with?

[The Rodent]

Yup, I know which one, but it's been that long since I saw it, and I've only seen it once, I'll have to try to remember what happened :D

[Skepsis93]

If it's a Christmas movie list it's incomplete without It's a Wonderful Life. ;)

[The Rodent]

Part Of Rodent's 5 Christmas Movie Marathon


Review #173 (5th Of 5): The Grinch
(aka: Dr Seuss' How The Grinch Stole Christmas)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e7/How_the_Grinch_Stole_Christmas_film_poster.jpg


The Grinch is a creature who lives just outside the city of Whoville... he hates everyone and everything in Whoville, especially the way the residents of the city gleefully celebrate Christmas.

When 8 year old Cindy Lou notices that most of the people are missing the point of Christmas and becomes aware of The Grinch's upsetting past, she nominates The Grinch to be this year's main participant in the Christmas celebrations.
But when The Grinch is insulted by the Mayor, he throws a tantrum and tries his best to spoil the Festivities...

... but his tantrum doesn't work and The Grinch starts work on a new plan... to literally steal Christmas while the populous sleeps.


Dr Seuss' fantastic tale is brought to the screen with much coloufulness and great set pieces... there's even a handful of decent actors making the best of it all too...

... and it's all for the kids too. Which is where the problems are.

The story itself will appeal to all ages, but the movie based on said story is a bit of a hit and miss affair.
Adults will probably find themselves looking at their watches during the running time.
It's very slapstick and filled with tons of colourful sparkle and funny sight gags that kids will love to giggle at, but there's very little for an adult who has grown up with Seuss' original stories.

As it is though, it's actually a pretty decent attempt at recreating the twisted world most people are familiar with. It looks fantastic and the overall use of the rewritten story shines through quite well.
I will say, there are one or two more adult jokes in the mix, but not many.


The acting is about the best of it all.
Taylor Momsen as Cindy Lou is spot on as the innocent and wide eyed little girl who tries her best to change the world around her.

Jeffrey Tambor, Christine Baranski, Jeremy Howard give backup, with Bryce Dallas Howard in a cameo... and Anthony Hopkins makes a show as The Narrator.

Jim Carrey however, obviously, stands out as The Grinch. He's almost unrecognisable, and for Carrey doing his usual bonkers thang that's quite an achievement. Think of it as a cross between The Mask, Ace Ventura and his acting in Liar Liar and you're getting close.


The action and choreography are utilised with gusto though, especially when Carrey gets going. There's tons of slapstick and lots of colourful flash and bang but again, it's all really for the kids and will leave any adults reaching for the door.
The overall effects are also top notch though, especially the makeup and prosthetic work.
It's very Seuss-esk and has an originality about it too.


---


All in all, it should have been more orientated toward all ages, especially with older generations having actually grown up with it...
Still though, it's lots of lighthearted slapstick fun with the very occassional adult joke or darker theme... and is very stylish in the look and sets.
Carrey is also on top form, and any movie with Carrey on top form is worth a look.

My rating: 78%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[mastermetal777]

Regarding the Grinch

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vL48P37aBSc

[nebbit]

Haven't seen Elf :blush:

[The Rodent]

Really? It's worth a look... very funny.

[JayDee]

Sorry mate had completely missed you rounding out your Christmas marathon. I really need to watch The Grinch again sometime. I had it in my mind that it was pretty poor but then a year or two ago I caught a large chunk of it, 50% or so and found it really good fun. Meant to watch the whole thing at some point this year but didn't get round to it

[The Rodent]

Review #174: Ghost

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f2/GhostA.jpg


Sam Wheat and Molly Jensen are a couple in love. They've just bought a new apartment and Sam is doing well as a Banker.
When what appears to be a routine mugging ends in Sam being shot and killed, Molly's life is turned upside down.

But Sam has refused to go into the light that has come for him and he begins to follow Molly around from the afterlife.
But while Sam is hanging around watching the people he cares about mourn him, he realises a dangerous and disturbing truth that lead to his death...

... and Sam must do everything in his power, with the help of a street psychic, to make sure Molly doesn't suffer the same fate.


For a film that appealed mainly to 1980s teeny boppers and housewives who wanted to see the main cast's romance scenes, Ghost is an immensely original fantasy, highly exciting and often disturbing and also a very touching film.

The main thing about the movie is the incredibly well written screenplay and script. Even the outlandish premise is very believeable and holds itself together really well, expecially with the talent on show.

The overall handling of the subject matter is something that everyone will associate with too. A Ghost, following his loved ones around and the emotions and anger, upset and feeling of love and connection is brilliantly played out in the script. It also does it without being too gushy or mawkish as well.
The scenes in the first two acts between Swayze, Moore and Goldberg are very well pieced together.

The film also holds humour well too. It manages to balance all the above seriousness with a mild undertone of comedy, mainly from Goldberg and Swayze's relationship, but there are one or two other hits of humour that are slightly darker when Sam (Swayze) starts discovering new powers.

There are a couple of gratuitously sappy and mawkish scenes in the running time though which may put some people off... one of them is really sappy, though the other one is sappy, but it's handled extremely well, especially after the fantastic build up that leads to said scenes.


The acting is also at its best.
Patrick Swayze, obviously is a stand out role in the film, being the title character, but it's also Swayze's best role. He's incredibly engaging, full of charisma and sorrow at the same time and holds the screen wonderfully. You can really see his emotions when needed too.
Demi Moore is also great as Molly. Not her best acting ever, but she's still seriously on top form. She's utilised sparingly throughout the film until the third act but whenever she's on screen, she's very believeable as the grieving widow.
Whoopi Goldberg is also immensly good as street psychic Oda Mae Brown. She's more of the everyman and comedy relief for the story. If anything, along with Swayze, it's Goldberg's best role. She carries the serious parts really well and never fails to raise a smile when needed. Her chemistry with Swayze is also immensly good.

Tony Goldwyn is an underrated piece of acting though. I won't say much about his part in the story for anyone who hasn't seen the film, but he's very good indeed.


The action and effects though are stunning when used.
Sam discovering new things leads to the action scenes at the end really, but it's the build up and character connection to the audience that make the more highly charged scenes more exciting.


The music and soundtrack is also heart poundingly touching at times too.


---


All in all, it won't appeal to everyone due to a handful of gooey scenes through the running time that are obviously designed to appeal to a girly audience, which is a shame because the other 99% of the film is incredibly touching, upliftingly exciting and full of heart.
It also has a handful of more disturbing storytelling and special effects too.
A very good film indeed, a must see.

My rating: 98%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[nebbit]

:love: this movie :yup:

[Sexy Celebrity]

Rodent...

http://a0.twimg.com/profile_images/2232479978/you_in_danger_girl.gifhttp://a0.twimg.com/profile_images/2232479978/you_in_danger_girl.gif
http://a0.twimg.com/profile_images/2232479978/you_in_danger_girl.gifhttp://a0.twimg.com/profile_images/2232479978/you_in_danger_girl.gif

[Sexy Celebrity]

Also, how many times have you watched Ghost now? 1,000?

[JayDee]

I'm sure there will be some haters but don't let them get you down, I still think Ghost is a great film. So much so I had it on my previous top 100 list somewhere in the 40s/50s. Don't know it would still be that high, or even on the list anymore, but still love it. It's funny, touching, exciting. And HK's favourite, Whoopi Goldberg, is excellent in it. Even though it's only a fairly minor role I also love Vincent Schiavelli in it as the Subway Ghost.

[The Rodent]

I've seen Ghost about 6 times, maybe 7... which over the period of 20+ years isn't bad for me, usually a film I review I've watched 30+ times :D

[The Rodent]

Review 175, time for a special... I've put it into a Spoiler Alert in case anyone hasn't seen it yet and doesn't want it to be spoiled.



Review #175: Prometheus

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a3/Prometheusposterfixed.jpg


After a bunch of symbols and hieroglyphs are found in caves on Earth and appear to be very similar to one another, and from completely different civilisations and timelines, a group of scientists are given funds to go out into space to follow the directions that are shown in the cave drawings.
What the team find though, is not just something out of this world... but sheer terror and a disturbing truth that will change the course of human existence forever.


Ridley Scott's follow up, or at least his lead up to, his original masterpiece Alien, is a bit of a hit and miss affair. Mainly hit though.
It fails at the first hurdle... a story that is conceivable.
A bunch of cave drawings that they decide to follow... it's all very unoriginal and bland really. It works well, but isn't anything groundbreaking in terms of story really.
Another thing is compared to the used future of the original movies, Prometheus, not just the ship but parts of the film too... just feel and look too modern. Especially with the Holographic tech on board the human ship.
This movie is set near 30 years before Alien but yet feels more futuristic...

I get the point that it's a science ship on a voyage but the filmmaking is kinda like the Star Wars Prequels... it suffers with the advances in filmmaking technology. It's all just too clean and clinical.


The rest of the story however is pretty inventive and has really been thought through by the filmmakers quite well.

The overall direction Scott has taken the story, i.e.; a side story to The Weyland Company's involvement with other world life forms... is very cleverly pieced together and hits the nail on the head when it comes to adding more depth to something that is relatively mysterious throughout the franchise.

The writing/rewriting of the creature background and the DNA and genetics side of things is also thought provokingly clever. It smashes the preconceptions about the Alien and its background completely and opens the whole thing up for another franchise.
Quite an exciting prospect really.

They've even managed to give to creatures a history in terms of Species too. The various creatures seen throughout bare a resemblence in one way or another to the original Alien, giving the whole notion of our beloved Xenomorph a genuinely real and organic world in which it came from.
Kinda like Tigers, Housecats and Lions having similarities... or varying Primates from Gorillas to Chimps to Humans having some sort of resemblance, Scott has given the notion that there is a real genetic and organic background to the creature that we all know.

Another thing that stands out in the story is the filmmaker's's ideas in the history of where human life came from, and the lead character's faith in God.

The character writing of some of the characters seen adds more depth to The Weyland Company too.
What stands out though is the air of paranoia that builds up at the beginning, the audience is never really sure who to trust. Kind of a throwback to the first two Alien films but still done with enough secretive writing that it works fantastically.
There are a few scenes about half way through too with a number of characters that make the audience question their judgement of said characters as well. You think you knew the character, but then you're thrown onto the backfoot.
So the character writing on all levels is top notch.


The acting good too.
Noomi Rapace as Elizabeth is on form. Many have compared her to Ripley, but she really isn’t anything like Ripley. Rapace really shows her worth as a relatively tough but kindly lead role. She’s also incredibly likeable.
Logan Marshall-Green also makes an impression. He’s very likeable and has great chemistry with love interest Elizabeth.
Charlize Theron is also a great piece of acting. Her character is a bit of an enigma throughout and is really the one people should compare to Ripley. Saying that however, Theron’s role is another unique take on a character and she plays it icily cold… but in a good way.

The stand out role though is Michael Fassbender as David. He is exceptionally good. He’s another one you’re never really sure about and his character develops throughout the running time. He’s also pretty likeable as well.

Back up comes from Idris Elba, Raif Spall and relatively unknown actor Sean Harris makes another engaging and memorable character.


The action and effects… well, as I said, are just a little too modern and automated in style.
They’re very, very well rendered… close to being the best CG effects I’ve seen in modern film, but that, like I said, is part of the problem.

There’s no dirt or grime, no snot or gore with exception to only a handful of scenes. Although, the scenes outside the ship on the planet, and on the other ship, the effects and CGI really work well. They just needed to knock it back a bit in a couple of scenes.
The action is top notch though and is exciting too, especially a couple of the scenes at the end. One thing that works with the action, is that Scott has utilised it sparingly rather than just being an action up for the sake of it which is what most movie tend to be these days.


---


All in all, not a patch on the original film, not a patch on the sequels either (with exception to Resurrection, which really is rubbish)… it’s still a decent movie though and has an incredibly clever twist that runs throughout the running time.
It does however crap all over the AvP backstory, which I do like, rather muchly.
It’s exciting too, especially in the storyline stakes and is really quite a talking point when it comes to the creatures and direction that Scott has taken the whole idea of their existence.


My rating: 89%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[TylerDurden99]

I thought this was ok, but I'm not a huge fan of the original Alien or Ridley Scott to begin with, so that probably has something to do with my mixed thoughts towards it.

[The Rodent]

Quick question, is the Spoiler Tag working? It doesn't seem to be working on my screen.

[TylerDurden99]

It isn't on mine.

[The Rodent]

Cheers mate, I'll let Yoda know.

[Loner]

I got it to work TR by removing all the BB code in between the spoilers bracket.

[The Rodent]

It's still not working for me, Loner. The box is still there but it isn't hiding the text like it should.

[Loner]

Review 175, time for a special... I've put it into a Spoiler Alert in case anyone hasn't seen it yet and doesn't want it to be spoiled.



Review #175: Prometheus

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a3/Prometheusposterfixed.jpg


After a bunch of symbols and hieroglyphs are found in caves on Earth and appear to be very similar to one another, and from completely different civilisations and timelines, a group of scientists are given funds to go out into space to follow the directions that are shown in the cave drawings.
What the team find though, is not just something out of this world... but sheer terror and a disturbing truth that will change the course of human existence forever.



Ridley Scott's follow up, or at least his lead up to, his original masterpiece Alien, is a bit of a hit and miss affair. Mainly hit though.
It fails at the first hurdle... a story that is conceivable.
A bunch of cave drawings that they decide to follow... it's all very unoriginal and bland really. It works well, but isn't anything groundbreaking in terms of story really.
Another thing is compared to the used future of the original movies, Prometheus, not just the ship but parts of the film too... just feel and look too modern. Especially with the Holographic tech on board the human ship.This movie is set near 30 years before Alien but yet feels more futuristic...

I get the point that it's a science ship on a voyage but the filmmaking is kinda like the Star Wars Prequels... it suffers with the advances in filmmaking technology. It's all just too clean and clinical.


The rest of the story however is pretty inventive and has really been thought through by the filmmakers quite well.

The overall direction Scott has taken the story, i.e.; a side story to The Weyland Company's involvement with other world life forms... is very cleverly pieced together and hits the nail on the head when it comes to adding more depth to something that is relatively mysterious throughout the franchise.

The writing/rewriting of the creature background and the DNA and genetics side of things is also thought provokingly clever. It smashes the preconceptions about the Alien and its background completely and opens the whole thing up for another franchise.
Quite an exciting prospect really.
They've even managed to give to creatures a history in terms of Species too. The various creatures seen throughout bare a resemblence in one way or another to the original Alien, giving the whole notion of our beloved Xenomorph a genuinely real and organic world in which it came from.
Kinda like Tigers, Housecats and Lions having similarities... or varying Primates from Gorillas to Chimps to Humans having some sort of resemblance, Scott has given the notion that there is a real genetic and organic background to the creature that we all know.

Another thing that stands out in the story is the filmmaker's's ideas in the history of where human life came from, and the lead character's faith in God.

The character writing of some of the characters seen adds more depth to The Weyland Company too.
What stands out though is the air of paranoia that builds up at the beginning, the audience is never really sure who to trust. Kind of a throwback to the first two Alien films but still done with enough secretive writing that it works fantastically.
There are a few scenes about half way through too with a number of characters that make the audience question their judgement of said characters as well. You think you knew the character, but then you're thrown onto the backfoot.
So the character writing on all levels is top notch.


The acting good too.
Noomi Rapace as Elizabeth is on form. Many have compared her to Ripley, but she really isn’t anything like Ripley. Rapace really shows her worth as a relatively tough but kindly lead role. She’s also incredibly likeable.
Logan Marshall-Green also makes an impression. He’s very likeable and has great chemistry with love interest Elizabeth.
Charlize Theron is also a great piece of acting. Her character is a bit of an enigma throughout and is really the one people should compare to Ripley. Saying that however, Theron’s role is another unique take on a character and she plays it icily cold… but in a good way.

The stand out role though is Michael Fassbender as David. He is exceptionally good. He’s another one you’re never really sure about and his character develops throughout the running time. He’s also pretty likeable as well.

Back up comes from Idris Elba, Raif Spall and relatively unknown actor Sean Harris makes another engaging and memorable character.


The action and effects… well, as I said, are just a little too modern and automated in style.
They’re very, very well rendered… close to being the best CG effects I’ve seen in modern film, but that, like I said, is part of the problem.

There’s no dirt or grime, no snot or gore with exception to only a handful of scenes. Although, the scenes outside the ship on the planet, and on the other ship, the effects and CGI really work well. They just needed to knock it back a bit in a couple of scenes.
The action is top notch though and is exciting too, especially a couple of the scenes at the end. One thing that works with the action, is that Scott has utilised it sparingly rather than just being an action up for the sake of it which is what most movie tend to be these days.





All in all, not a patch on the original film, not a patch on the sequels either (with exception to Resurrection, which really is rubbish)… it’s still a decent movie though and has an incredibly clever twist that runs throughout the running time.
It does however crap all over the AvP backstory, which I do like, rather muchly.
It’s exciting too, especially in the storyline stakes and is really quite a talking point when it comes to the creatures and direction that Scott has taken the whole idea of their existence.


My rating: 89%
http://1.2.3.11/bmi/1.2.3.10/bmi/1.2.3.11/bmi/1.2.3.9/bmi/i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/RodentSupermanRecommendedBMP.jpg

Can you see what I did?

[The Rodent]

Can't see what you did... but yours is working, mine isn't.

I've tried deleting and redoing it, but it's still not working for me.
I've done spoiler tags before and they've worked fine, just this one seems to be playing up.

[PeterVincent]

I agree Rodent. I agree...

May Fassbender be with you.

[Loner]

I'm sorry I couldn't help.

[The Rodent]

No probs Loner, cheers for trying though matey.
I've just tried typing the spoiler box in rather than using the spoiler tag to select the text... got the same result.

Have removed the box. If it's not working, may as well not have it for now.

[Sexy Celebrity]

It's me, Rodent. I have learned how to use The Force.

[The Rodent]

You're the Dark Side of The Force... Darth Sexius Celebrius.

[The Rodent]

I agree Rodent. I agree...

May Fassbender be with you.


:D
Not a fan of his but he is rather good in Prometheus.

I'm glad I bought the DVD though, and am looking forward to a sequel if they ever do it.

[Yoda]

Just FYI, Loner's correct. The basic idea works like this: the spoiler tag puts the text in a light gray block and makes the text that same light gray color. But if you use bbCode that overrides that--in this case, even bbCode that makes the text plain black--that takes precedence and it doesn't get made gray, and thus stays visible.

So, if something like this happens, you can bet it's probably the bbCode. Highlight the spoiler text and hit the "Remove Formatting" button from the top left of the editor (it looks like two letter As with an X through them), and that should do it. :)

[The Rodent]

Review #176: Willow

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7b/Willow_movie.jpg


Willow Ufgood, an Elwyn Dwarf is a farmer and a father of two, a good husband and an aspiring Sorcerer.
When his children discover a Daikini (tall person) baby flaoting down the river on some driftwood, Willow reluctantly takes the child in.
But the family are in for a shock when they discover that the child is being hunted by other Daikinis. The village Sorcerer gives Willow a quest, to take Elora Danan (the baby) away from the village for the Elwyn's sake and give it to the first Daikini he sees. But Willow's simplistic journey takes a twist when the first tall person he finds is Madmartigan, a renegade Swordsman, disgraced Knight and wanted criminal...

... and through more unforseen circumstances, Willow and Madmartigan end up on a quest to protect Elora Danan and fight an evil Queen who has her sights on destroying The Baby Of The Prophecy.


What a magical magical film.
Willow delivers a few miss hits throughout the running time, but not many.

What the movie has is a highly detailed look at a fantasy world and builds the adventure and excitment through hints of humour and occasional mild slapstick and lashings of stunt filled action.

It has a similar naivety to The Dark Crystal from time to time. It's almost an experiment in the world that's being built but the sheer scope of the film is magnificent.
There's also tons of new ideas running throughout mixed with older storytelling and some linear plotlines that somehow lead from a quiet unassuming fantasy into an action laden story of Witches and Wizards. It's very well pieced together.

Another thing with the movie is it's full of humour, mild cheesiness when needed and occasionally more dark and disturbing cinema added to the mix.
The humour and comedy especially are very organic and realistic and laugh out loud funny too.


The acting is also top notch.
Warwick Davis is the titular Willow. At only 18 years old too he holds the screen fantastically and really shows his worth as a bit of an action hero. He also seems to have had a ton of fun on set too.
Val Kilmer backs up Willow as Madmartigan. Kilmer is a massive surprise. He fits the bad boy with a heart perfectly and swings a sword around perfectly. As Willow says "You really are great!".
Kilmer and Davis have massive chemistry too.

Joanne Whalley gives a bit of a dual role as Sorsha... a love interest for Kilmer. She's not used much until the third act but she's pretty good.
Jean Marsh stands out too as evil Queen Bavmorda. Her role is another that isn't seen a mahoosive amount but she lingers with the viewer for a long time.

Back up comes from little actors Tony Cox, Phil Fondacaro and screen legend Billy Barty.
Others are Gavan O'Herlihy, Kevin Pollak, Rock Overton and another screen legend Pat Roach.
All give 110%.
Non actress Julie Peters as Willow's wife Kaiya is also another masterclass in acting. It's one of the most underrated background performances I've seen in any movie.


The effects are also groundbreaking.
Many forget that Willow is the movie that broke several moulds in several places. The Morphing Scene computer technology was actually invented for the film and has been used and tweaked in hundreds, if not thousands of films since.
ILM was still using stop-motion and matt-paintings in those days and had been experimenting with computers but Willow is the film that brought the tech to the populous.
They still used stop motion and matt-paintings in Willow, but you could say it's the Grandaddy of modern CG films.
It's also pretty seemless. Not perfect, but I've actually seen worse from modern films.

The action is also wonderfully choreographed and exciting. Especially the swordplay and sorcery that goes on throughout the running time.


---


All in all, not perfect due to some of the experimental screenplay and naivety to the world that was invented for the film but Willow is still a rip roaring adventure filled with humour and action and some wonderful special effects.
Kids will love it, even though it's occasionally dark from time to time and adults of all ages will take something from it, it's that much fun.

My rating: 92%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[honeykid]

I'm gutted this is up against one of my films. Not only will it win easily, but I hate this. I'm not saying it's a 'bad film', per se, it's just the usual fantasy film crap that I don't like.

[The Rodent]

Well, Bio Zombie was bound to go out at some point... may as well get it over and done with rather than delaying the inevitable.

;)

[honeykid]

True. I think the only hope it has is that the people who haven't seen it don't/can't and so, don't/can't vote. :D

[The Rodent]

Rerun with sequel time!! A rerun of Review #112 and the follow up from 2012.

Review #112: The Expendables

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/76/Expendablesposter.jpg/220px-Expendablesposter.jpg

A bunch of Mercenaries are hired to take out a South American Dictator, their job is simply an 'in and out hard hitting mission', under the guidance of a local woman called Sandra, who knows the area.
Upon scoping out the mission, Team Leader Barney Ross (Stallone) decides it's too risky and aborts the mission... but Sandra is captured and Ross has his conscience played on by the fact that she was captured due to their involvement with her.
He decides to go back into the warzone, to take out the Dictator, and free the woman he barely knows...

... tagging along, whether he wants them to or not, are his Band Of Mercenary Brothers...

... The Expendables.


A serious throwback to the 80s and 90s musclebound hero genre, from Predator to Die Hard and from pretty much anything with Schwarzenegger to anything starring Stallone himself...
... The Expendables hits hard and fast and has a very simplistic story of morality behind it.

It also contains pretty original character sidelines too, most of them containing morality and conscience tweaking backstory.
The movie then combines action heroes of years gone by with a few modern ones too and gives them some almost comicbook adapted names (Toll Road, Hale Caesar, Yin Yang etc), then throws the whole lot into an explosive no-brainer for pretty much the entire second and third acts.

What makes the movie work, is that it never hides from what it is...

... it's a no-brainer, yes, but at least has that throw-back storyline to it... but it knows it's a no-brainer and it knows it's actually been written that way too.
Stallone has also incorporated some top class acting from a bunch of guys that aren't really known for their acting prowess.
They're all lots of fun and really know their place in the story, and know their places in their roles, and can all punch the bad guy (albeit with an overly used bass sound effect) absolutely brilliantly.
The main thing really though when taking the movie in, is ego.

The Expendables crew consists of Stallone, Jason Statham, Jet Li, Randy Couture and Terry Crews with backup from Mickey Rourke and Dolph Lundgren.

Baddies include Eric Roberts, David Zayas, 'Stone Cold' Steve Austin and Gary Daniels.

Backing up all those heavy hitters are Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger in smaller cameo appearances but both on screen at the same time as Stallone. That's something to see, believe me.

The action is also turned up for fans of the 80s/90s actioner... it's very big, very loud, very OTT, full of cheesey one-liners and quite simply... it knows it is.
It's lots of fun and makes someone in their 30s, like me, reminisce for those days gone by.
The other thing with the action, is that the entire cast suffered injuries while filming, especially Stallone when he came up against Steve Austin. It's very hard hitting.

The sequel that's out this year, though with some bad press recently, hopefully will be as explosive as this one... especially with additional scenes between Arnie, Willis and Stallone and the heavy hitting additions of Van Damme (playing a baddie called Jean Villain, yes, another comicbook name), and Chuck Norris as an Expendable too.


All in all a mixed reception gave The Expendables a low(ish) score, but it never tries to be something that it isn't. It's loud, brash, fun, comicbook and has the nostalgic no-brainer feel about it.
What makes it work... is that it's completely shameless.
My rating 90%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)




Review #177: The Expendables 2

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ed/The_Expendables_2_poster.jpg


Barney Ross and his band of Brothers have hit a snag... the after math of the first film has seen them in debt with CIA man Mr Church and he has given Barney an ultimatum... retrieve a secret object from a downed CIA airplane, with the help of an associate of Mr Church... or go to prison for a very long time.

But the routine and easy mission takes a turn for the worst and Barney and his boys go off mission again, but this time for revenge against a man called Jean Vilain... a villain who has seriously crossed the line.


Another decent movie from Stallone and the Boys. This time round, a new director is in the chair instead of Stallone and it gives the whole aura a different yet recognisable feel.

For a start, Ex2 is louder and much more fun than it's predecessor.

The action is really the main thing but there's more of a coherant plot to this one. The reason for Barney and his men going into the battle ground is much more plausable than the original film and has much more of a personal air about it too.
The story doesn't disappoint either. It leads to a number of exciting scenes and some more sombre scenes too throughout the running time and carries the weight of the OTT action brilliantly.

It is a bit more light hearted than the first film in terms of overall atmosphere, but in a good way. It's not all serious serious serious with only hints of humour.

This time round we're also treated to some fantastic one liners that beat the original film by miles. It's very very knowing in the humour of the dialogue as well which gives a brilliant air of comedy to the mix of sombre story and explosive blood soaked action.

One thing that lets the film down is some of the CGI blood and gore. It removes some of the shock factor of the action scenes.


The acting is about the same in this one as the original.
Stallone though has been given more time to act being that he's not the director this time round. His character is able to progress more than in the first film.
Newcomer Yu Nan as Maggie, Mr Church's associate is a standout role though. She doesn't do a massive amount but she's a breath of fresh air in a film that's jam-packed with testosterone.

Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger are wonderful in the film though. They play more of a duo in the third act and seeing the pair, with Sylvester Stallone by their side, shooting guns and driving cars, spouting one liners as they go and playing off of one another for the kicks is immense to see on screen.

We're also treated to Jean-Claude Van Damme as Jean Vilain... yes, in keeping with some of the comical names we have a villain with the name Vilain... The Plank however is on top form. His natural on-screen presence lifts the character to great heights and he has a really strange and dangerous psychopathic undertone to his character. I loved JCVD in this film.
I was dubious about Chuck Norris though after some of the bad press the movie recieved... but Chuck is kept to a minimum, background character. When seen though, he's tons of fun and lifts the action too when he's seen in the thick of battle.

Sadly, there's little show from Jet Li in this one. His character had to be written out due to scheduling conflicts but he's on form while on screen.


The action and effects though are, as I said, what the film is about.

We have Sly, Willis and Big Arn side by side... we have Statham doing more acrobatics, heavy hitters with Crews and Couture, Dolph Lundgren calling everyone "insects" and some huge explosive choreography mixed with some nice stunts enhanced by some CGI work too.

Then there's a showdown at the end too between... ah, you'll have to watch, no spoilers ;) but it's great to see the two come to loggerheads.


---


All in all, it's still not perfect like the original film... but it's even more shameless in the dialogue and cheese factor and has ramped up the action and ramped up the stakes of the story too.
More fun than the first and much more exciting too.

My rating: 92%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[Daniel M]

Good reviews Rodent, I didn't enjoy the first one as much as you, don't remember liking it but the second one I was pleasantly surprised and found it really good enjoyable stuff, I have the first one on DVD, so I'll give it a rewatch sometime perhaps :up:

[The Rodent]

Quick update of my reviews...

PAGE 1

1 - Young Guns
2 - A Nightmare On Elm Street (2010 Remake)
3 - 2012
4 - Cowboys And Aliens
5 - Cloverfield
6 - Leon
7 - Dreamcatcher
8 - Alien 3 Definitive Version Vs Theatrical Release
9 - The 'Burbs
10 - Starship Troopers [11]


PAGE 2

11 - Predator
12 - Robocop
13 - John Carpenter's The Thing
14 - Alien Vs Predator and Aliens Vs Predator Requiem
15 - Terminator Foursome (1-4)
16 - The Fourth Kind
17 - Jurassic Park
18 - Pirates Of The Caribbean Original Trilogy (1-3)
19 - The Dark Crystal
20 - Tremors [27]


PAGE 3

21 - Paul
22 - Full Metal Jacket
23 - Demolition Man
24 - Dumb And Dumber
25 - Ridley Scott's Robin Hood
26 - Christopher Reeve Superman Foursome (1-4) And Superman Returns
27 - Batman Begins
28 - The Dark Knight
29 - Ghostbusters
30 - Star Wars Franchise (1-6) [46]


PAGE 4

31 - Critters
32 - The Matrix Trilogy (1-3)
33 - Arachnophobia
34 - Super 8
35 - The Shawshank Redemption
36 - The Abyss
37 - Troll Hunter
38 - John Carpenter's The Fog
39 - Dog Soldiers
40 - The Shining [58]


PAGE 5

41 - Indiana Jones Foursome (1-4)
42 - Robert Rodriguez' Predators
43 - Sam Raimi's Spider Man Trilogy (1-3)
44 - Rocky Franchise (1-6)
45 - The Lost Boys
46 - Evolution
47 - Alien Foursome (1-4 Includes A Rerun Of Review #8)
48 - Jurassic Park Trilogy (1-3 Includes A Rerun Of Review #17)
49 - Gremlins Duo (1 & 2)
50 - Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (Original Movie) [82]
51 - 30 Days Of Night

PAGE 6

52 - From Dusk Till Dawn
53 - I, Robot
54 - Steven Spielberg's War Of The Worlds
55 – Blade Runner
56 - Armageddon
57 – Signs

PAGE 7

58 - The Quick And The Dead
59 - Ransom
60 - The Big Lebowski [92]
61 - Ghostbusters Duo (1 & 2 Includes A Rerun Of Review #29)

PAGE 8

62 - Pitch Black
63 - The Day After Tomorrow
64 - Independence Day
65 - Cat's Eye
66 - Equilibrium
67 - Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes
68 - The Karate Kid (Original Movie) [100]
69 - Die Hard Franchise (1-4)
70 - Poltergeist [105]


PAGE 9

71 - The Passion Of The Christ
72 - Paranormal Activity
73 - Paranormal Activity 2
74 - Pulp Fiction
75 - Critters Foursome (1-4 Includes A Rerun Of Review #31)
76 - Unforgiven
77 - Black Hawk Down
78 - The Fly (1986 Remake)
79 - Lake Placid

PAGE 10

80 - Back To The Future Trilogy (1-3) [119]
81 - Lethal Weapon Foursome (1-4)
82 - Star Trek Franchise (1-11)
83 - Of Mice And Men
84 - An American Werewolf In London

PAGE 11

85 - Predator 2 (Includes A Rerun of Reviews #11 & #42)
86 - Jaws
87 - American Pie Original Trilogy (1-3)
88 - Godzilla
89 - The Negotiator
90 - The Green Mile [144]


PAGE 12

91 - The Mist
92 - Silent Hill
93 - Highlander
94 - The Goonies
95 - Batman
96 - Batman Returns

PAGE 13

97 - I Am Legend
98 - Titanic
99 - Saving Private Ryan
100 - Avatar [100th Review, 154th Movie]


PAGE 14

101 - The Simpsons Movie
102 - District 9
103 - Slither
104 – Wanted

PAGE 15

105 - Casino
106 - No Country For Old Men
107 - Blown Away
108 - The Cowboys
109 - K-PAX
110 - The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy (1-3) [166]
111 - Edward Scissorhands

PAGE 16

112 - The Expendables
113 - Little Shop
114 - 3:10 To Yuma

PAGE 17

115 - Trainspotting
116 - A Bug's Life (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon)
117 - Cars (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon)
118 - Monsters Inc. (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon)
119 - WALL-E (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon)

PAGE 18

120 - The Incredibles (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon) [176]
121 - Gladiator
122 - The Dark Knight Rises (Includes A Rerun Of Reviews #27 & #28)
123 - King Kong
124 - Mortal Kombat

PAGE 19

125 - Appaloosa
126 - Legend
127 - Dead Calm
128 - The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button
129 - Top Gun
130 - Mission: Impossible Foursome (1-4) [130th Review, 189 Movies In Total]
131 – Twins

PAGE 20

132 - Pearl Harbor
133 - Tremors Trilogy (1-3 Includes A Rerun Of Review #20)
134 - Paulie
135 - Hard Target
136 - Universal Soldier
137 - Sudden Death

PAGE 21

138 - Timecop
139 - The Crow
140 - American History X [140th Review, 200th Movie]
141 - Gone Baby Gone

PAGE 22

142 - Waterworld
143 - The Fifth Element
144 - Cop Land
145 - Mississippi Burning
146 - Beverly Hills Cop Trilogy (1-3) (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)

PAGE 23

147 - Field Of Dreams (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
148 - Stand By Me (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
149 - Rain Man (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
150 - Big Trouble In Little China (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
151 - Who Framed Roger Rabbit? (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
152 - Innerspace (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)

PAGE 24

153 - Short Curcuit Duo (1 & 2) (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
154 - Commando (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
155 - Explorers (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)

PAGE 25

156 - The Untouchables (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
157 - Flight Of The Navigator (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
158 - Platoon (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
159 - Uncle Buck (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
160 - Weird Science (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
161 - The 40 Year Old Virgin [224]

PAGE 26

162 - The A Team
163 - Dante's Peak
164 - Volcano
165 - Hancock
166 - True Grit Vs True Grit

PAGE 27

167 - Watchmen
168 - John Carpenter's The Thing And The Thing (Includes A Rerun And Small Edit Of Review #13) [232]
169 – Scrooged (Part Of Rodent’s 5 Christmas Movie Marathon)
170 – Bad Santa (Part Of Rodent’s 5 Christmas Movie Marathon)

PAGE 28

171 – Home Alone (Part Of Rodent’s 5 Christmas Movie Marathon)
172 – Elf (Part Of Rodent’s 5 Christmas Movie Marathon)
173 – The Grinch (Part Of Rodent’s 5 Christmas Movie Marathon) [237]
174 - Ghost

PAGE 29

175 - Prometheus
176 – Willow

PAGE 30

177 – The Expendables 2 (Includes A Rerun Of Review #112)

[The Rodent]

Review #178: Dredd

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/16/Dredd2012Poster.jpg


America is an irradiated wasteland.
Within it lies a city.
800 million people living in the ruin of the old world.
Only one thing fighting for order in the chaos...

... Judges.

Judge Dredd is the most famous of the Judges and today he's been given an assignment: To take a rookie Judge out on the streets for an on the job evaluation.
What the pair come across though, is a city Megablock that is owned by one of the most ruthless criminal drug leaders in Mega City One, a woman called Ma-Ma... and with the arrest of one of Ma-Ma's men, she decides the best thing to do is wage an all out war against two Judges who have stepped onto her turf.


It's about time.

A genuinely heavy hitting, gory, violent and extremely well written screenplay that brings one of the finest character creations in history to the screen. And does it with style too.

Dredd is simply an actioner to be sure, but the backdrop of the futuristic Mega City One and the cramped corridores of Peach Trees Megablock make for a highly enjoyable thrill ride of gunplay and grizzly voiced one-liners from Karl Urban.
The overall writing is pretty simplistic too... it's a case of "here's the plot, now on with the action" kinda thing, but Dredd does offer a small handful of twists along the running time in terms of some of the characters and also never shies away from the original comicbooks in terms of style or substance.
The overall feel of the film is also straight forward. This is the setting, let's get on with it.

One very good thing though, is that anyone who isn't up on 2000AD Comics won't be lost with the film. The writing is good enough that even non readers will be able to follow it and even be able to enjoy the overall aura of the film.

There's even a brilliant tonal balance between the satire and violence that made the comics so well loved too.

One thing though is lack of robots and other gizmos involved in the comics, including changes to Dredd's Lawmaster Bike, but due to a low budget the movie had to make a few cuts here and there. It's forgivable though with the rest of the writing and screenplay, shooting and choreography being so well pieced together.


The acting is also spot on.

Karl Urban was pretty much born for this role.
In retrospect, Ahnuld has Terminator, Stallone has Rocky and Rambo, Vin Diesel has Riddick... Karl Urban is Dredd... he's deadpan, tough, unbending in his characterisation of everyone's beloved Judge and manages to capture the humour from behind his mask fantastically.
Olivia Thurlby plays rookie Judge Anderson. She's also bang on the money. More of an everyman for the movie and she's utilised as a kind of plot developer too due to a little twist in her character's abilities. She's also very likeable.

Lena Headley is also extremely good as Ma-Ma. She isn't used as much as I'd have liked, her screen presence should have been utilised more. Still though, when on screen she's extremely well developed in terms of character and threat.

Backup comes from Wood Harris and Domhall Gleeson...
... and there's a memorable showing from Langley Kirkwood, Edwin Perry, Karl Thaning and Michele Levin as a kind of Foursome.


The action and effects though are really what it's all about... and being a Dredd film, rightly so.
It's Gritty, hard edged, gory and doesn't shy from all the things that Hollywood frowns at.
The choreography and CG work combined with some of the most explosive gunfire scenes I've ever seen, gives Dredd an edge over most other modern actioners.

The movie also uses a number of slow motion shots too, especially with the effects of the drug called Slo-Mo used by the bad guys and it gives a wonderful visual to movie.

It's very hard to see that the movie was low budget. It's that well shot.


Mix to all that, a thumping soundtrack and some wonderfully atmospheric background tunes too, the movie really comes together.


---


All in all, not a welcome return to the screen... it's a welcome turn to the screen for Judge Dredd.
Highly stylised visually and aesthetically and full of action and small hits of dark humour combined with great acting.
Dredd rightly so is an 18 rated adult film with thrills and spills of sheer rambunctious joy.

An excellent film.

My rating: 96%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[JayDee]

Nice review mate. :up: This is one of the many films from 2012 that I missed at the cinema but definitely plan on catching up on someday.

[The Rodent]

Highly recommend it matey... It's definitely a Buyer...

[The Rodent]

Review #179: Repo Man

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/46/Repo-Man-Poster.jpg


Otto Maddox is a down and out punk kid with little hopes for his future. His friends are all either high school drop outs or criminals, or both.

When a chance meeting with a man called Bud brings Otto into the world of repossessing property from people who don't pay their bills, his life begins to turn around, and, although reluctant at first to become a Repo Man, he finds his new job fulfilling and exciting...

... but rumours of Aliens in a trunk of a car in the area, Otto and Bud are going into a world they didn't know, and probably didn't want to know, existed.


Super low budget but handled with extreme care for detail in character, sees one of the best drama-thriller-comedy-sci-fi movies ever made.

Over the years, Repo Man has gained a Cult Status throughout the movie world but is an absolute must see just for sheer terms of character writing and the low brow world that the filmmakers have built around an extremely simple premise.
It's very stylised in terms of substance too. The filmmakers have also utilised surreal storytelling and some non-linear screenplay that gives the film a very different flavour than any other low budget movie of its type.

Some of the visuals and product placing are, though probably down to licensing, another hint of clever filmmaking. If you watch carefully for the tins of beer and cans of non-descript food that the characters eat and drink, you'll see what I mean.

There's also a massive tonal difference between the scenes too... the first and second acts are relatively close in tone with the occasional look at the sci-fi side of things, but the third act changes dramatically as it progresses.
It's also highly adult too with some scenes of drug taking and the language involved. In Britain in holds an 18 rating.

The first two acts are also laugh out loud funny in places too.


The acting is really what it's all about though.
Emilio Estevez is at his best as Otto. He plays the punk attitude and the young kid with a chip on his shoulder fantastically. Outside of Young Guns and Stakeout, it's the role he's most remembered for.
Harry Dean Stanton makes the biggest impression as Bud though. His surrogate father figure to Otto is highly engaging, full of charisma and wisdom and knows how to look after himself too. Dean Stanton's best role by far.

Back up comes from a bunch of relatively unknown actors in the forms of Sy Richardson, Olivia Barash, Eddie Velez, Del Zamora, Fox Harris and singer/actor Dick Rude makes an appearance too.


The action is only small scale though, but what there is is down to story and character as well which gives a nice exciting edge to the more highly charged cinema.
Most of it is quick and swift and based in reality and never drags itself out too long either.
The third act is a bit more stretched out though, but in terms of story and surrealism, it works really well.

The effects are low budget though... some of it reminded me of the olde 1950s sci-fi movies like War Of The Worlds, but it gives a timeless aura to some of the action.


The soundtrack is also highly stylised and utilised to give the film a great atmosphere. With a showing from Los Angeles hardcore Punk Band Circle Jerks, you'll have an idea what to expect.


---


All in all, lots of style, lots of substance, low in budget that gives the substance and character much more weight than they could have had.
The Cult status of the film may put anyone off who hasn't yet seen it, but Repo Man is an incredibly clever and enjoyable film filled with disparate storytelling, surrealism and characters... and has some brilliantly placed humour between the well written philosphical character speeches that are rife throughout the film.
A must see.

My rating: 98%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[JayDee]

God I love Repo Man! Was on my top 100 list last time out and pretty sure it would still be on there somewhere. Reminds me so much at times of Pulp Fiction with the lives of a sizeable cast intersecting, the in-car discussions and the glowing secret in the boot/briefcase respectively.

[The Rodent]

Must see... one of those 80s films that people overlook... but absolute must see.

[The Rodent]

Review #180: Alien Hunter

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/64/Alien_Hunter_DVD_cover.jpg


Cryptologist Julian Rome is hired by the Governement to help a team of scientists research an alien signal that appears to be eminating from an apparent Alien Black Box that is found buried in the Antarctic ice.

Upon reseaching the object and studying the signal Julian and the team discover an amazing truth...

... it contains a still living alien... and a virus.


Currently watching this and have to write a review.

Childlike dialogue and what appears to be a budget so low that the filmmakers couldn't afford a new story.

For a start, the premise is a tweaked version of John W Campbell's Novel Who Goes There? mixed with elements of almost every other sci-fi movie you can think of, especially though with the look of the movie being a rip off of Carpenter's The Thing.

There's even footage stolen directly from Carpenter's film as well and they refer to the alien as "The Thing" too.

What is different about the film is that the first two acts are very quiet and almost drama like in terms of storytelling (albeit cod-drama).
There's very little in terms of sci-fi stuff going on apart from the odd piece of dialogue and setting that flits between the scientist's camp and some sinister looking Government types who are passing Top Secret Documents between them, secretly, at the White House.

The third act picks up a bit and tries to be atmospheric but sadly, it's less atmospheric than the Elm Street Remake.

The constant badly written keyboard music in the background reminded me of low budget Made For TV Films too.
The dodgy romance thrown in by the writers is also the kind of thing seen in poorly made TV films too.


The acting is also sub-standard.
James Spader is the exception though. He plays Julian Rome and as usual, Spader takes his role and lifts it to something better than was on the page.
The writing of Spader's character however, seems to have been lifted directly from Stargate though, so Spader has a pretty good idea on how to approach the role I guess.

The rest however comes from non-actress Janine Eser, John Lynch, Nikolay Binev and Stuart Charno.
Yes, I haven't heard of any of them either.


The effects and action, for what they are, are also poor. Low budget and utilised very badly by the effects crew. It's also pretty boring even when the scenes of peril are getting going. Some of the effects at the end also reminded me of The Abyss.
Along with stealing from every other sci-fi from the past number of years, the creature design reminded me of a cross between Independence Day, Predator, a Facehugger and the Xenomorph... a kind of ID4PredAlien...

Even some of the sets are a direct mirror from many other films too. Especially The Thing.


---


All in all, miss it. One of the worst Sci-Fi movies I have seen... stealing many, many ideas from many, many other movies and doing it without any style or substance at all.
Spader is the only redeeming feature... but even then, he's not great.

So far, only one movie in my Reviews Thread has ever managed to gain a 0% rating, which was Superman 4: The Quest For Peace.

My rating: 0%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRejectedStampNew_zpsad11e9b5.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRejectedStampNew_zpsad11e9b5.png.html)

[JayDee]

Huh. I was actually thinking of taping that film the other night as I'm a fan of both the sci-fi genre and James Spader. I forgot about it though; really doesn't sound like I missed all that much. :D

[The Rodent]

Nah, you didn't miss much mate, bad bad film.


Now seeing as I made Review #180 a bit of a downer... I give you:

Review #181: Two Thirds Of The Three Flavours Cornetto Trilogy...

Red Strawberry

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ec/Shaun-of-the-dead.jpg


Salesman Shaun is a bit of a slacker. His job sucks and his life outside of work revolves around drinking with his pot dealing best mate Ed down at the Winchester Pub, playing video games in his underpants with his pot dealing best mate Ed... and forgetting about his Girlfriend Liz's needs.

When Shaun crosses the line and forgets about a romantic Anniversary dinner with Liz, she dumps him, only for the world to come under attack from Zombies...

... and Shaun does everything he can to make sure that his Mum and Stepdad, his best mate Ed and his ex-Girlfriend are safe from attack...

... by taking them to the Winchester Pub.


Awesome awesome awesome... three words right there that describe Shaun down to a Z...

Many call the film a parody of many other movies but Shaun really is a highly inventive and incredibly clever throwback to the horror genre, with a ton of new stuff thrown in and lashings of typical Pegg And Frost humour.
If you want a Pegg/Frost Parody movie, watch Paul.

For a start, everything in the film is recognisable.
The character traits of the main two heroes being slacking no good boyfriends who immediately think "Winchester Pub" when the Zombies attack is just a part of the real life humour that's laden throughout the film.

The other thing is the dialogue writing, especially with two sides of the story.
One being the arguements between Shaun, Ed and whoever they're fighting with...
The other being the pally side of things between Shaun and Ed too.
It's very, very authentic and gives the one-liners and humour much more of an edge than any other buddy movie going.
Even the more colourful language is laugh out loud funny.


The acting is also spot on.
Simon Pegg as Shaun and Nick Frost as Ed are absolutely two of a kind. Their chemistry on screen is so real (obviously with them being real life besties). It's been a long time since there's been such a special screen duo. They're fantastic.
Kate Ashfield as Liz is also an inspired piece of casting. Her chemistry with Pegg is another top piece of work and Ashfield is seriously likeable. She's definitely the right pick for a girlfriend for Shaun.

Back up comes from Penelope Wilton, Dylon Moran, Rafe Spall, Lucy Davis, Jessica Stevenson, Martin Freeman, chameleon actor Peter Serafinowicz and acting heavyweight Bill Nighy.


The other thing that really pieces the film together perfectly is the almost slapstick and surreal nature of some of the stunts and highly charged cinema.
It adds even more depth to the action and even more humour to the blood and gore on screen too.

Smashing a Pub Landlord with pool cues to a Queen soundtrack has to be seen to be believed.

The gore and blood effects are also top notch, especially some of the Zombified locals.


---


All in all, Shaun sums up what it takes to make an almost perfect comedy horror.
It's highly gory when needed, full of great acting chemistry, real and surreal, has great dialogue and even manages to pull a few heartstrings with the character arcs that run through the running time too.
Brilliant.

My rating: 97%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)




---


Blue Original

http://hollywoodhatesme.files.wordpress.com/2010/12/hot_fuzz_ver6.jpg


Nicholas Angel is an exceptional Policema... ... Police Officer.
He's so successful that his collegues in London are embarrassed by his success and his Superiors ship him off to a quiet little, crime free town called Sandford in the middle of nowhere, much to Nicholas' chagrin.

Within minutes of arriving in Sandford however, he arrests most of the youth population and near closes the local pub too.
Basically making a name for himself immediately.

When something ominous appears in the shadows of Sandford's alleyways, Nicholas, long with his new Police Officer Partner Danny Butterman, start making waves by accusing everyone on Sandford of wrong-doings.

Is Nicholas' inability to "turn off" causing him to go mad?
Or is Sandford, the crime free Model Town, really just a cover for something more sinister?


Another awesome, awesome awesome (yep, an extra awesome) turn of events from the team behind Shaun Of The Dead.
This time round, the overall aura of the film is a touch more serious but the humour and dialogue writing is just as good, just as real and surreal in places and, if not a little bit better than the predecessor.

It contains the same hints of small scale storytelling with a hint of larger things going on in the background as Shaun had, but in a sleepy town setting rather than inside a pub.
The main thing with Fuzz though is that there's a much better written character arcs on all levels. Pretty much all of the main cast are given room to grow with their respective roles, and Pegg and Frost are given much more fleshed out characters too, who then develope along the running time as well.
The dialogue has also been tweeked, along with some bad language anad some extremely funny one-liners mixed into the occasional talky and more quieter scene between new-cop-buddies Angel and Butterman.

With all that mixed with the acting chemistry that was seen in Shaun, this film is a definite must see.


Which brings me to the acting.
Pegg and Frost, well, where to begin. They seem to have had much more riegn with this one. A large chunk of their scenes were also ad libbed (albeit in-keeping with the script) along the running time to and it makes the whole thing much funnier.

Back up this time round comes from heavyweight Bill Nighy (again), Martin Freeman (again), Rafe Spall (again)... but with additions from Paddy Considine, Olivia Coleman, Bill Bailey, Bill Bailey again, and more heavyweights in the forms of Edward Woodward, Steve Coogan, Cate Blanchett, Joe Cornish, Jim Broadbent and Timothy Dalton.

Everyone on board also seems to be enjoying themselves immensly too. The overall atmosphere is tip top.


What's special about Fuzz compared to the first film, is that it's much more high octane in terms of action and effects.

There's the usual surrealsim in terms of some of the scenes like Shaun did, but the action overall is much more explosive, much faster, much more exciting and still has elements of blood and gore and bad language to it too.
With Pegg's character Angel being a Supercop, imagin Shaun Of The Dead but with, well, a Supercop in the thick of the action.

They're also managed to incorporate some homages to other movies amongst the chases and gunfights too. Top stuff!


---


All in all, louder, prouder, funnier and much better written. The chemistry on screen is top notch and the action and effects improved 100%.
It's also much more likeable with the fact that there's more characters to get behind and laugh out loud with.
It's also a rare thing, although it's not a direct sequel, it still outweighs the first film.

My rating: 98%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)





---


In August this year when the third and last film is released, I'll rerun these two and include Green Mint Choc Chip...

[Sexy Celebrity]

I liked Shaun of the Dead a lot, but I'm not that crazy about Hot Fuzz. What's the third movie going to be called?

[The Rodent]

The World's End...

[Daniel M]

Good reviews man, I love both of those films :up:

[JayDee]

Not seen Hot Fuzz, largely as I didn't particularly care for Shaun all that much. It had some funny moments but it was hampered by the cast for me. I find Pegg to be a bit annoying at times, and can't stand Nick Frost! Will need to give it another shot someday though

[honeykid]

^^That was a great post until that last sentence, JD.^^

[The Rodent]

I find Pegg and Frost's other movie Paul a right annoyance but the Cornetto Movies/Crew are exceptional films.

Well worth two or three watches.

[The Rodent]

Review #182: Reign Of Fire

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c6/Reign_of_Fire_movie.jpg


In London at the beginning of the 21st century, a bunch of construction workers start digging underground to make way for a new underground rail system. A young boy called Quinn visits the site regularly due to his mother being one of the workers, but on one of his visits, Quinn, his mother and the rest of the construction crew unwittingly awaken a sleeping creature that has apparently been buried for a millenia...

Near 10 years later, the Earth has been over-run by Dragons and a small group of survivors lead by Quinn are scratching a living from hiding, running and, well, hoping, that their farm stock and crops aren't discovered by the flying terrors that have taken over the world... until that is, another group of heavily armed survivors appear at the walls of their stronghold, claiming that they're Dragon Slayers.


What a shame. A budget of $60m, a director that brought us The X-Files TV Episodes, Alien Nation, Quantum Leap and 21 Jump Street and a team of decent producers is sadly a poor excuse for what was marketed as an actioner full of Dragons and gunfights.

The trailers gave me goosebumps. But they give the completely wrong impression of what to expect.

The film is basically a toned down apocalyptic drama... with Dragons as the bad guys instead of Nuclear Fallout and evil marauders.
It's very, very unatmospheric in terms of style too.

It's very small scale overall with the sets, relies mainly on human emotion and politics (people starving, who's in charge, what do we do if all goes bad... etc etc) as the storytelling devices and contains very little in terms of exciting action. The Dragons are barely seen throughout either.

Again, the trailers give an impression of the film being based around Dragon fighting and action backed up by an actual story... but at any one time you'd be lucky to see more than one creature on screen.

It's a damned shame really, the Dragons are instantly recognisable and are extremely well rendered in the effects department, the sets are beautifully designed and the setting is also extremely well realised. It just wasn't utilised well at all in the storytelling stakes at all.

It's also extremely linear in the sequence of events. To the point that it actually becomes so predictable that it becomes boring.

There is a nice chunk of ramped up action toward the last 20 minutes of the film, but again, it relies heavily on a revenge/personal plot device, which, with the bad writing overall, feels pretty contrived.


The acting is probably the best part of it all. Even with the poor dialogue and story.
Christian Bale as Quinn is spot on. His voice seems a bit odd though, ok he is British, but his accent feels put on at times. Still though, he carries the character extremely well, especially when Quinn gets out of his depth in the action.
Izabella Scorupco plays Alex, a kind of love interest for Quinn. She's also pretty good considering the poorly written script.

The standout role though is Matthew McConaughey as Denton Van Zen, the leader of the Dragon Slayers.
It's by far McConaughey's best role to date. He's tough, emotional when needed and shows his worth toward the end, even though he's a hero you really come to despise at times.

Back up comes from Gerard Butler (who is actually pretty wooden throughout), Alexander Siddig and a small role from Alice Krige.


---


All in all, another poor movie for my thread.
It's entertaining when it gets going, sadly though, it hardly ever does get going.
Badly written and directed, but possibly worth a watch for the half decent acting and small handful of Dragon effects.
Which is a shame because the effects and CG/Model work are absolutely fantastic.

My rating: 23%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRejectedStampNew_zpsad11e9b5.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRejectedStampNew_zpsad11e9b5.png.html)

[The Rodent]

Review #183: Porky's

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6e/Porkys.jpg


In 1954, a bunch of All American High School kids in Angel Beach try to help each other out in losing their virginity... along the way, many pranks (mostly sexual), bad language, beer swilling and fights ensue with the group agreeing on one thing...

...to go to Porky's Bar in a nearby town and hire a couple of Hookers.

But it doesn't quite go as smoothly as they hoped and the group are ripped off.
In a revenge plot, one of the group ends up hospitalised by Porky and his goons.
With the help of the brother of the hospitalised group member, who also happens to be the local Sheriff, plan another revenge attack.


Written, directed and produced in part by Bob Clark (Black Christmas), Porky's is the original High School Gross Out Movie.

The overall storyline, which there are one or two, are pretty well put together though.
The movie revolves around the adolescent fumblings that many will find recognisable and borders on comedy classic, especially with the dialogue involved.

Another small sub-plot is the relationships between the group of boys too. One of the relationships is based around broken homes and racism... which adds just the smallest touch of seriousness to the proceedings.


The rest of the film plays out simply like one long rude and crude joke, full of sexual language, pranks and sexual shenanigans on behalf of the main cast, with anything else coming in a close second.
Think of the film as a gross out coming of age comedy drama more than anything else.
Similar to American Pie, just with more likeable characters.

Not all of it works, but there are tons and tons of incredibly funny and laugh out loud moments between the knob gags.


What makes the whole thing bind together though is the chemistry of the cast. They obviously had a ton of fun while filming and it shows throughout the movie from start to end.
It's very hard not to like the main group and get swept up in the series of funny events.


Dan Monahan is the main cast member as Pee Wee. He's seen most throughout the film and plays the teen humour well.

Back up comes from Wyatt Knight, Mark Herrier, Roger Wilson, Tony Ganios, Cyril O'Reilly, Scott Colomby and Kaki Hunter.
Kim Catrall also makes a memorable show.

Chuck Mitchell plays the titular Porky and makes a memorable bad guy in the process too.


There's little action as such, apart from a couple of scenes and the last 10 minutes or so, and though it's pretty unfeasable with what happens at the end, the cast hold it all together really well and make it believable.


---


All in all, the original teen gross out film.
The acting chemistry and the overall atmosphere of the film have inspired many a copy ever since... and the overall aura has never been bettered.
Still though, a couple of miss hits through the running time with the occasion sub-plot knock it down a peg or two.
I will say though: Ignore the cash-in sequels.

My rating: 87%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[Sexy Celebrity]

I have the Porky's box set. I love Porky's Revenge. It is nothing but naked guys.

[Godoggo]

Yeah, I didn't really like Porky's all that much, but it's way better than American Pie.

[The Rodent]

Review #184: Fly Away Home

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/cd/Fly_away_home_poster.jpg


When 13 year old Amy and her mother are involved in a car accident in New Zealand that leaves Amy's Mother dead... she moves back in with her estranged Father, Tom, in Canada.
Her Father is a struggling inventor and homemade aircraft enthusiast and at first, Amy struggles with dealing with her Mother's death and being around a Father, his girlfriend and her Father's brother, all of which she she barely knows.

When construction crews begin tearing down a nearby forested area, Amy finds an abandoned nest of Goose eggs and she takes them in and incubates them. Eventually becoming a surrogate Mother to the orphaned birds.

With the support of her new family, she realises that without helping the birds find their way south in winter, they will more than likely end up dead.
So they hatch (ahem) a plan... and Tom constructs an aircraft for Amy and teaches her to fly...

... and together they work in the hope that they can teach the Geese what they need to know.


What a beautiful movie.
There are a few misses along the way, but Fly Away Home is a story about love, loss and hope that is incredibly well handled with care for detail.

The overall screenplay is linear, but that doesn't matter with the general exposition of the storytelling being so well pieced together.
Along with the usual sub-plots of love and loss, the film doesn't ever get sickly or mawkish...
It manages to balance the realistic background of the story with the more heart touching elements perfectly.

The other thing is the humour involved throughout. It's all real life based and mainly comes from the learning curves that the main characters are going though, ie; Learning to deal with change, new relationships and a kind of coming of age story too.


It's labelled as a True Story though.
Really the only truth is the experiments that have been held by teaching real orphaned Geese to fly south using light aircraft to teach them.
The rest of the story, Amy, Tom etc etc is all fictional.

It works though, and makes the viewer feel that the strange ideas behind the film are actually real and it makes it all more believeable.


The acting is also bang on.
Jeff Daniels plays Tom, the Father. He very real throughout the filmand very naturalistic too. One of Daniels' best.
Anna Paquin, though at a young age and making the odd mistake along the way is extremely engaging and full of childlike wonder.
When her character starts coming of of her shell though is when Paquin really shines.

Dana Delany also shines as Tom's girlfriend Susan... she's not seen a massive amount throughout but she plays off Paquin and Daniels well.

Backup comes from Terry Kinney, Holter Graham and Jeremy Ratchford.


As for the action and more exciting cinema. It's all based around Tom and Amy's shenanigans with the aircraft and learning to fly.
There's also the occasional hit of peril when it comes to the birds too...

... and with the highly engaging actors, characters and storylines, it really makes for some exciting cinema.
Especially when the hits of peril and excitement are kept to a minimum and utilised to enhance to story rather than just for the sake of it.


---


All in all, an occasionally exciting drama full of discovery, great acting, situational humour and a storyline that really works well with the realistic yet slightly far out subject matter.

It's also heartwrenchingly touching at times too, especially in the third act.
A very well balanced film indeed.

My rating: 95%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[honeykid]

I agree with you, Rodent, it's a lovely film. I'd recommend it to anyone who's in the mood for good, heartwarming family film.

[JayDee]

Wow I've not seen Fly Away Home in forever! From what I remember though it's a film I used to really love. Will definitely need to revisit that one someday

[Deadite]

Yeah, Fly Away Home is a fantastic family movie. Very heartfelt and smart.

[nebbit]

I loved this movie :yup:

[The Rodent]

Cheers guys, time for the special review, managed to time it about right too...

Review #185, my 250th Film...

Going to make some changes to the layout after this one, have yet to decide exactly how but hoping to make it a bit more colourful and have some extra pics etc...

Review #185: Rear Window

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/38/Rear_Window_film_poster.jpg


L.B "Jeff" Jeffries ends up chair bound in his apartment after he vreaks his leg.
Apart from the ocassional visit from a Nurse and arguing with his upmarket girlfriend Lisa over her being too good for him, Jeff has little to do except watch his neighbours from his livingroom window.
One night Jeff spots something strange with the Mr and Mrs Thorwald in the apartment across from him... and he begins to suspect that Thorwald has murdered his wife...

Has the boredom twisted his mind and made him paranoid about the people in his block? Or has Mr Thorwald really been up to no good?

One of Hitchcock's best, Rear Window is a thriller like no other.
It combines many elements of genres, from drama to thriller to bordering paranoid horror...

What stands out though, is that most of the film unfolds in one place and the main star barely moves from one spot.
It's also down to the dialogue writing too. The film doesn't just throw the plot in your face just to get things rolling.
The cast go through a lot of inane babble and philosophical talk about love and relationships, society, marriage and other pointless ramblings but it adds such an air of authenticity to the film and gives the characters a real depth.
And even though some of it does cover sub-plots and character building background, the most inane conversations are highly engaging.

I couldn't help but want to sit and listen to the pointless talks, I was sitting imagining some of the things they were talking about, especially the talks between Jeff and Lisa and their differing lifestyles.
A lot of it contains chunks of humour too, especially with some of Jeff's dialogue when he's talking about marriage to Lisa.

Mixed into that is the wonderful way in which the film unfolds with Jeff spying on his neighbours. They're all shown from a distance and it adds a very realistic and recognisable aura to the people he's watching.

There's also a number of almost spooky visuals and scene settings contained throughout that add an air of euthentic mystery to some of the things Jeff is watching.

Not all of it works, the film sadly has aged slightly... it is near 60 years old after all... but still, that doesn't take away to much on how wonderfully well made it is overall.


James Stewart plays Jeff... and he's absolutely on top form. His down to earth everyman who turns slowly into a paranoid and obsessed curtain twitcher is not only well realised and ocassionally funny, but also at times quite disturbing as the other side of his character evolves.
Grace Kelly plays Lisa, she too is wonderful. Her prim and proper upperclass persona shines through perfectly from Kelly. Her chemistry with Stewart is also brilliant, especially when they start disagreeing with each other.

Thelma Ritter makes a nice show too as the dismissive nurse who takes care of Jeff.

Backup comes from Raymond Burr, Judith Evelyn, Georgine Darcy and there's a show from Wendell Corey as a Police friend of Jeff.


As for 'action' as such, there's little on show, the film revolves around the quiet mystery and paranoia that builds up through the running time. The ocassional hint of more exciting cinema though, and the discovery that the characters go though, especially when Jeff sends Lisa out on an 'errand' is handled exceptionally well.


---


All in all, Hitchcock at his finest.
Full of intrigue, incredibly engaging, extremely well written and full of mystery and wonderful atmosphere.
It's also ocassionally funny... there were some scenes I just found myself locked onto the screen smiling constantly.
A wonderful thriller and an absolute must see.

My rating: 99%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[JayDee]

Nice review Rodent. :up: Nice to see some Hitchcock in your thread. :yup: And I'm curious to see your new layout

[Godoggo]

Rear Window is my favorite Hitchcock movie. Great review.

[mark f]

Well of course it is.

[Godoggo]

Have I said that a lot on the forum?

[donniedarko]

I'd second that it's the best Hitchcock. Two stories to follow, the murder, and the other windows.

[mark f]

Have I said that a lot on the forum?

I hadn't noticed before.

[The Rodent]

Cheers guys, here's a rundown of my reviews so far... as for my new layout, JayDee, I'm curious to see it too, I have no idea what it'll look like yet :D


PAGE 1

1 - Young Guns
2 - A Nightmare On Elm Street (2010 Remake)
3 - 2012
4 - Cowboys And Aliens
5 - Cloverfield
6 - Leon
7 - Dreamcatcher
8 - Alien 3 Definitive Version Vs Theatrical Release
9 - The 'Burbs
10 - Starship Troopers [11]


PAGE 2

11 - Predator
12 - Robocop
13 - John Carpenter's The Thing
14 - Alien Vs Predator and Aliens Vs Predator Requiem
15 - Terminator Foursome (1-4)
16 - The Fourth Kind
17 - Jurassic Park
18 - Pirates Of The Caribbean Original Trilogy (1-3)
19 - The Dark Crystal
20 - Tremors [27]


PAGE 3

21 - Paul
22 - Full Metal Jacket
23 - Demolition Man
24 - Dumb And Dumber
25 - Ridley Scott's Robin Hood
26 - Christopher Reeve Superman Foursome (1-4) And Superman Returns
27 - Batman Begins
28 - The Dark Knight
29 - Ghostbusters
30 - Star Wars Franchise (1-6) [46]


PAGE 4

31 - Critters
32 - The Matrix Trilogy (1-3)
33 - Arachnophobia
34 - Super 8
35 - The Shawshank Redemption
36 - The Abyss
37 - Troll Hunter
38 - John Carpenter's The Fog
39 - Dog Soldiers
40 - The Shining [58]


PAGE 5

41 - Indiana Jones Foursome (1-4)
42 - Robert Rodriguez' Predators
43 - Sam Raimi's Spider Man Trilogy (1-3) [66]
44 - Rocky Franchise (1-6)
45 - The Lost Boys
46 - Evolution
47 - Alien Foursome (1-4 Includes A Rerun Of Review #8)
48 - Jurassic Park Trilogy (1-3 Includes A Rerun Of Review #17)
49 - Gremlins Duo (1 & 2)
50 - Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (Original Movie)
51 - 30 Days Of Night [83]

PAGE 6

52 - From Dusk Till Dawn
53 - I, Robot
54 - Steven Spielberg's War Of The Worlds
55 – Blade Runner
56 - Armageddon
57 – Signs [89]

PAGE 7

58 - The Quick And The Dead
59 - Ransom
60 - The Big Lebowski
61 - Ghostbusters Duo (1 & 2 Includes A Rerun Of Review #29) [93]

PAGE 8

62 - Pitch Black
63 - The Day After Tomorrow
64 - Independence Day
65 - Cat's Eye
66 - Equilibrium
67 - Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes
68 - The Karate Kid (Original Movie) [68th Review 100th Movie]
69 - Die Hard Franchise (1-4)
70 - Poltergeist


PAGE 9

71 - The Passion Of The Christ
72 - Paranormal Activity
73 - Paranormal Activity 2
74 - Pulp Fiction
75 - Critters Foursome (1-4 Includes A Rerun Of Review #31)
76 - Unforgiven
77 - Black Hawk Down
78 - The Fly (1986 Remake)
79 - Lake Placid [116]

PAGE 10

80 - Back To The Future Trilogy (1-3)
81 - Lethal Weapon Foursome (1-4)
82 - Star Trek Franchise (1-11)
83 - Of Mice And Men
84 - An American Werewolf In London [136]

PAGE 11

85 - Predator 2 (Includes A Rerun of Reviews #11 & #42)
86 - Jaws
87 - American Pie Original Trilogy (1-3)
88 - Godzilla
89 - The Negotiator
90 - The Green Mile [144]


PAGE 12

91 - The Mist
92 - Silent Hill
93 - Highlander
94 - The Goonies
95 - Batman
96 - Batman Returns [150]

PAGE 13

97 - I Am Legend
98 - Titanic
99 - Saving Private Ryan
100 - Avatar [100th Review, 154th Movie]


PAGE 14

101 - The Simpsons Movie
102 - District 9
103 - Slither
104 – Wanted [158]

PAGE 15

105 - Casino
106 - No Country For Old Men
107 - Blown Away
108 - The Cowboys
109 - K-PAX
110 - The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy (1-3)
111 - Edward Scissorhands [167]

PAGE 16

112 - The Expendables
113 - Little Shop
114 - 3:10 To Yuma [170]

PAGE 17

115 - Trainspotting
116 - A Bug's Life (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon)
117 - Cars (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon)
118 - Monsters Inc. (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon)
119 - WALL-E (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon) [175]

PAGE 18

120 - The Incredibles (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon)
121 - Gladiator
122 - The Dark Knight Rises (Includes A Rerun Of Reviews #27 & #28)
123 - King Kong
124 - Mortal Kombat [180]

PAGE 19

125 - Appaloosa
126 - Legend
127 - Dead Calm
128 - The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button
129 - Top Gun
130 - Mission: Impossible Foursome (1-4) [130th Review, 189 Movies In Total]
131 – Twins

PAGE 20

132 - Pearl Harbor
133 - Tremors Trilogy (1-3 Includes A Rerun Of Review #20)
134 - Paulie
135 - Hard Target
136 - Universal Soldier
137 - Sudden Death [197]

PAGE 21

138 - Timecop
139 - The Crow
140 - American History X [140th Review, 200th Movie]
141 - Gone Baby Gone

PAGE 22

142 - Waterworld
143 - The Fifth Element
144 - Cop Land
145 - Mississippi Burning
146 - Beverly Hills Cop Trilogy (1-3) (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon) [208]

PAGE 23

147 - Field Of Dreams (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
148 - Stand By Me (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
149 - Rain Man (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
150 - Big Trouble In Little China (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
151 - Who Framed Roger Rabbit? (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
152 - Innerspace (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon) [214]

PAGE 24

153 - Short Circuit Duo (1 & 2) (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
154 - Commando (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
155 - Explorers (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon) [218]

PAGE 25

156 - The Untouchables (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
157 - Flight Of The Navigator (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
158 - Platoon (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
159 - Uncle Buck (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
160 - Weird Science (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon)
161 - The 40 Year Old Virgin [224]

PAGE 26

162 - The A Team
163 - Dante's Peak
164 - Volcano
165 - Hancock
166 - True Grit Vs True Grit [230]

PAGE 27

167 - Watchmen
168 - John Carpenter's The Thing And The Thing (Includes A Rerun And Small Edit Of Review #13)
169 – Scrooged (Part Of Rodent’s 5 Christmas Movie Marathon)
170 – Bad Santa (Part Of Rodent’s 5 Christmas Movie Marathon) [234]

PAGE 28

171 – Home Alone (Part Of Rodent’s 5 Christmas Movie Marathon)
172 – Elf (Part Of Rodent’s 5 Christmas Movie Marathon)
173 – The Grinch (Part Of Rodent’s 5 Christmas Movie Marathon)
174 – Ghost [238]

PAGE 29

175 - Prometheus
176 – Willow [240]

PAGE 30

177 – The Expendables 2 (Includes A Rerun Of Review #112)
178 - Dredd
179 – Repo Man
180 – Alien Hunter
181 – Two Of The Three Flavours Cornetto Trilogy [246]

PAGE 31

182 – Reign Of Fire
183 – Porky’s
184 – Fly Away Home
185 – Rear Window [185th Review 250th Movie]

[Sexy Celebrity]

Review the other two Porky's movies.

[The Rodent]

No way... :D

I see the others like the Schumacher Batman... I reviewed the first two Batman films but skipped the third and fourth... I did the same with Karate Kid, I reviewed the first one and skipped the three sequels and the remake... Porky's is the same, I'm skipping those ones.

There are some films that I just can't bring myself to watch again.

[Sexy Celebrity]

I think Porky's Revenge is a fun movie even after you factor out the enormous amount of bare assed men you see in it. I might review it myself then.

[The Rodent]

Well, here's the first of my new look reviews...

Review #186, Movie #251
Robin Hood: Prince Of Thieves

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4f/Robin_hood_1991.jpg

Year Of Release
1991

Director
Kevin Reynolds
Kevin Costner (uncredited)

Producer
Pen Densham, Richard Barton Lewis, John Watson

Cast
Kevin Costner, Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio, Alan Rickman, Christian Slater, Nick Brimble, Michael Wincott, Geraldine McEwan, Mike McShane, Sean Connery and Morgan Freeman

Notes
Kevin Costner and Kevin Reynolds worked together on a number of films, including Fandango, Dances With Wolves and Waterworld. Waterworld being the last of their relationship, as during filming they fell out and Reynolds walked away near the end of filming, leaving Costner to take up the reigns as second director.
They didn't speak for many years, but for the DVD commentary for Robin Hood they reconciled their differences and began talking again.

---

Robin Of Loxley is an English Nobelman captured in Jerusalem on Richard The Lionheart's Third Crusade. During a daring escape, he frees his friend Peter and a Moor known as Azeem and they make their way out o fthe prison. After Peter is killed, Robin makes a vow, to return to England and protect Peter's sister Marian.

On their return to the Homeland however, Robin realises that things are very different to how he remembers them.
His Father has been accused of Devil Worship and has been murdered, and the Loxley land has been taken by the Sheriff Of Nottingham as a forfeit.

To end this siege of tyranny by the Sheriff, Robin begins to steal back what rightfully belongs to the People and ends up branded as an outlaw... but more peril is around the corner when it appears that Nottingham is after stealing one more thing from England...

... King Richard's Throne.



One of the best written and most fun of the many Robin Hood incarnations is brought to the screen.
Thieves is often seen as a favourite of chick flick lovers, but it's actually a rip roaring adventure filled with some incredibly exciting cinema, funny visuals and dialogue and is packed with some incredibly well written humour and realistic tones.

For a start, the film may well be highly inaccurate historically, but it never tries to be something it isn't.
It's fun, tongue in cheek at times and is a knowing romantic fantasy that occasionally throws itself back to the olde swashbuckling films of years gone by.

Which is probably the best way to describe the overall look and feel of the film, a swashbuckler.




The humour is also reality based. The overal chemistry on screen between the actors lifts the humour too and some of it is laugh out loud, though mostly it's cleverly incorporated into the action and dialogue.
The other thing is the screenplay and script. It's immensely clever. It takes a lot of the olde tales of Robin Hood, tweeks them a little then throws the whole lot into a very well written backstory of love, vengeance and revenge.

The screenplay also pretty irregular. Most films are broken into three parts, or three acts... Thieves, if you look closely, is broken into four pieces. It gives the film a brilliant longevity and epic feel that is rarely seen in any other film going.

Another thing are the visuals... the film contains a pile of iconic and recognisable set pieces and a ton of highly realised scenes that have since become regarded as classic.




Now, the acting...

Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio is an absolutely perfect piece of casting as Maid Marian. Her slight and prim persona shines through wonderfully and Mastrantonio has an immensely engaging and wise character about her.
Morgan Freeman stands out too as Robin's stalwart pal Azeem. Freeman was nominated for best screen duo alongside Costner but should really have won awards for best actor. He's incredibly likeable and full of mystery at times too. His overall chemistry with anyone on sscreen with him is also brilliant.

Alan Rickman is another incredible role. Rickman made my Top 40 Villains list. He hams it up incredibly and has such a massive camp and theatrical air about him that it makes the unpredictable side of the character even more fun. He's also incredibly funny, especially when he loses his temper.

Now, Costner as Robin Hood is a bit of a chalk and cheese issue. The acting and overall character of Costner is perfect for the role. He's fun, funny, highly engaging and is filled with incredible charisma... sadly though, the accent lets it all down. Costner decided just to use his normal accent... now, it does kinda work... but an American Robin Hood just feels a bit strange when everyone else has English voices.

Backup comes from Christian Slater (also sporting an American accent) as Will Scarlet, Geraldin McEwan as Mortiana The Witch and Michael Wincott as Guy Of Gisborne.
Nick Brimble makes a show as Little John too... out of the rest of the background actors, Brimble really shines, especially alonside Costner.



The action though is really what the film builds for. The third act is immensely exciting and well choreographed and makes for some of the most iconic visual action to date.
There's a number of action set pieces running throughout too that keep the audience fixed to the screen and it's all used to enhance the story rather than just for thrills. It's also well choreographed throughout rather than having all expense saved for the finale.



---


All in all, the best of the Robin Hood films... highly stylised, full of great acting charisma and great chemistry.
The action and effects are also full of explosive excitement and the overall aura of the love/revenge/vengeance storyline is incredibly well written.
The film also gave the populous a theme song that broke several records.

A classic swashbuckling fantasy.

My rating: 94%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[JayDee]

Well, here's the first of my new look reviews...

Hmmm....details about the year of release, the director and the cast, as well as 'notes' which provide some 'trivia' for the film? This layout all seems strangely familiar but I can't place it! :p


Anyway good effort on the review. :up: It was in my mind that I loved this film but I hadn't seen it since I was quite young. Revisited it a few years back and found it rather naff! :D But a rather enjoyable kind of naff. Will need to give it another watch

[The Rodent]

Lol! I'm working on it... the new look will probably change a little as time goes on, like with the older look. My first few reviews were pretty short and had little to them but they progressed as I went on...

Hopefully the new look will do the same as I get more used to adding a few details and pictures and stuff.

Cheers for reading and all the +reps though everyone!!

[Sexy Celebrity]

Your reviews look exhausting to write up. You really spend a lot of time on all of this. Anyway, the new style of your reviews looks cleaner and I see you've added more pictures.

[JayDee]

Your reviews look exhausting to write up. You really spend a lot of time on all of this.

You kidding me?! This boy's a slacker compared to some of the long-winded reviews I churn out! :D

[The Rodent]

Review #187, Movie #252 & #253
Speed And Speed 2: Cruise Control

Speed

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/45/Speed_movie_poster.jpg

Year Of Release
1994

Director
Jan De Bont

Producer
Mark Gordon

Writer
Graham Yost

Cast
Keanu Reeves, Sandra Bullock, Jeff Daniels, Joe Morton, Alan Ruck and Dennis Hopper

Notes
Speed is the culmination of several influences. Writer Graham Yost was told by his Father about the film Runaway Train starring Jon Voight, which itself was an idea based on an Akira Korusawa script which involved a bomb on a train... Yost then watched the film and thought that crossing the two ideas and making it about a bomb on a bus would work even better.
The ending of Speed was also influenced by the Wilder/Pryor film Silver Streak.


---


LAPD SWAT Jack Travern and Harry Temple are thrown into a desperate situation when an old foe appears on the scene and wires a bus with explosives...

If the bus goes 50mph, the bomb is armed... if the bus then drops below 50mph, the bomb will explode.

Jack and Harry must find a way to get on the speeding bus, disarm the bomb, catch the maniac and save the poor members of the public who are trapped on board the vehical.

One of the most realised action films of the 1990s brings newly Christened action star Keanu Reeves into a world of excitement and thrills...

Speed is by far one of the most inspired and modern classic action films to date. With the many influences it draws on, the writers have pieced together a relatively linear script in the first two acts, then twisted the whole thing around for the third... never letting up with the tension and humour at all throughout the running time.

What makes the film work, is that it never takes itself seriously all the time... it combines hints of comic style action and stunts with some relatively serious thrills and spills and a story that holds up well against standard no-brainer actioners.

Basically it's a clever balancing act of brainless popcorn action fun filled with humour and funny dialogue and more serious storytelling with the occasional sombre scenes and mildly disturbing cinema too.



The acting is also bang on.
Keanu Reeves absolutely shines. He was born for the role. He plays the more serious tones really well too and never lets the audience get bored while the more quieter scenes are playing out. His charisma and chemistry with all on screen with him is top notch too.

Sandra Bullock also shines as Annie. Bullock seems to be having an absolute whale of a time, especially after an accident sees her become the driver of the bus. She also holds the more serious and scarier scenes exceptionally well.
Out of all of Bullock's other films, this one is my favourite... she's lots of fun.

Dennis Hopper though as maniac Howard Payne is a standout role. As usual with Hopper, he's taken a well written and fleshed out character and lifted it brilliantly from the page. He's also not seen a great deal but the viewer never forgets that he's there, always in the background. He's that good.

Backup comes from Jeff Daniels, Joe Morton and Alan Ruck makes a nice show as a guy who's out of his depth.



The action and effects are also incredibly exciting... and most of it, gladly, is practical.
Keanu Reeves also performed most of his own stunts too, which adds a real authenticity to the explosions and the leaping from moving car to moving car.
The choreography is also completely shameless... the filmmakers have combined elements of realistic stuff with more fantastical action, all of which are again practical, and it gives the film a completely different feel to other actioners.


---


All in all, tons of fun and full of cheesie one liners, great choreography and some serious tones for good measure too.
The acting is also full of charisma and realistic tones mixed with well placed humour and some wonderful chemistry throughout.
Some of the stunt work is also dazzling.

A modern action classic. A must see.

My rating: 93%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)






Speed 2: Cruise Control

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f3/Speed_two_cruise_control.jpg

Year Of Release
1997

Director
Jan De Bont

Producer
Jan De Bont, Steve Perry, Michael Peyser

Writer
Jan De Bont, Randall McCormick, Jeff Nathanson

Cast
Sandra Bullock, Jason Patric, Temuera Morrison, Colleen Camp and Willem Dafoe

Notes
Similarly to Speed, Speed 2 has connections to other action movies... initially the script for Speed 2 was written to be the sequel to Die Hard, basically Die Hard on a boat... but was rewritten into Speed 2. On a similar note, the original Die Hard film was actually written to be a sequel to Schwarzenegger's Commando


---


Annie Porter and her new boyfriend Alex Shaw are having problems... she's just found out he has lied to her about his job, he is in the LAPD SWAT but had lied to her because of the stories she told him about the problems she had with Jack Travern.

He offers to make amends by taking her on a romantic Cruise around the Caribbean...

... unbenkown to them, John Geiger is aboard the ship and he plans on robbing the ship of its cargo of Jewellery... and to add more peril, he's laced the decks of the ship with explosives...

It's up to Alex and Annie to stop the maniac and get on with their romantic break.



What an awful movie.
Speed 2 is not just cashed in, it's cheap, cheesie, full of terrible action sequences and is filled to the brim with wooden acting and badly written dialogue.

Sadly, it's just trying to live up to the superior original.
It's also easy to see why Keanu Reeves turned down an offer to return.
Which may be why it doesn't work on many other levels, there's little for the audience to care for with the rewritten characters.

The filmmakers have tried very hard to give the film an air that's recognisable, but it falls flat with the cashed in script and screenplay.
The overall exposition is pretty dull and uninteresting too. You just don't care about what's going on.
The story is also boring and much of a muchness. A guy who is threatening to detonate bombs while stealing jewellery. Yawn.



The acting is awful too.
Sandra Bullock returns as Annie... and even Bullock herself has been quoted as hating the film, wishing she'd never made it.
Willem Dafoe is also off form. He's hardly threatening, has little charisma and seem to be wondering why he's in the film.

Jason Patric is also miscast. I love Patric, he's one of my favourite actors, but here in a rewritten Keanu role, he just completely dies. He's wooden, out of his depth in the action and has very little likeability.

Temuera Morrison makes a show too... put it this way, any film with Morrison on the cast list is bound to be a Razzie winner.



Which brings me to the overall action and effects.
They're cheap, badly choreographed and the handful of computer effects are badly rendered and hold little excitement when they're used to 'enhance' the more exciting cinema.


There's not really much else I can say about Speed 2 without resaying more and more about how crap it is.


---


All in all, dubbed by critics as one of the worst sequels ever made, and one of the worst films ever made too.
I'd have to agree to an extent, though I have seen worse... a couple of those worse are in my thread somewhere too.
Still though, anyone who hasn't seen the original may enjoy it a touch, just do youself a favour and miss this one anyway.

Awful movie.

My rating: 4%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRejectedStampNew_zpsad11e9b5.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRejectedStampNew_zpsad11e9b5.png.html)

[JayDee]

Gotta love Speed. :yup: Seen it a good few times now over the years and still awesome. Still never seen the sequel. Not expecting a great film but will watch it one day purely out of curiousity.

[teeter_g]

Speed was good. Speed 2 was awful. Speed was one of those movies where the ending was nice and they should have just left it alone.

[The Rodent]

Review #188, Movie #254
Deep Blue Sea

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/73/Deep_Blue_Sea_%281999_film%29_poster.jpg

Year Of Release
1999

Director
Renny Harlin

Producer
Akiva Goldsman, Robert Kosberg, Tony Ludwig, Alan Riche, Rebecca Spikings

Writer
Duncan Kennedy, Donna Powers, Wayne Powers

Cast
Saffron Burrows, Thomas Jane, LL Cool J, Michael Rapaport, Stellan Skarsgard, Jacqueline McKenzie and Samuel L Jackson

Notes
Screenwriter Duncan Kennedy was inspired to write a shark story after suffering nightmares after seeing first hand what happens when a shark attacks a person.
Although the filmmakers tried their hardest to keep away from Spielberg's Jaws, they still threw in the odd homage to Spielberg's Masterpiece, including a Tiger Shark with a car license plate stuck in its teeth, the license plate is identical to the one Hooper finds inside the dead Tiger Shark in Jaws.


---


Dr Susan McAlester is a scientist on a floating research facility called Aquatica.
Her research on shark brains has found a cure for Alzheimer's in humans, but her testing and research is not as crystal clear as she has made out for the past few months... and one night, when there's only her and a handful of people left on the skeleton crew, the sharks fight back...

... and the small group of humans find themselves trapped underwater in the bowels of Aquatica...

... with the sharks quit literally chasing them through the corridors.




Bit of a hit and miss this one.
Deep Blue Sea could have been a great film.
Instead the viewer is treated to a well laid out storyline, decent plot developement that was utilised with little in the way of actual substance. There's also masses of cheesiness, especially when LL Cool J is on screen. His character wasn't really even needed tbh.


The overall story is quite believeable though. Scientific research that changes the animals, who then run amock... Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes +10 years...

It really does work quite well in the storytelling stakes... what lets it down is the formulaic screenplay and general exposition. It's very predictable.
There are one or two little twists in the story that are well hidden and well concieved, they're just too little too late really.


Saffron Burrows plays Dr McAlester. She's a bit of an enigma to start with but as her character progresses, you come to hate, then love her. Quite a well fleshed out character really. She also gets almost nude too... :D
Thomas Jane does his usual quiet, wise yet tough guy routine. He's likeable though and is apt throughout the action. He's really the muscles for all the scientific brains in the film.

Samuel L Jackson makes a nice show too. He was originally going to play LL Cool J's character, but they wrote in another character, specifically for him. Jackson is also a bit of a changing character as the movie progresses. He's also really likeable.
LL Cool J however is a massive miss on every level. More of a comedic relief without any chemistry or style... or substance for that matter. As I said, the movie didn't really need him. His role throughout could have passed to another character tbh.

Backup comes from Stellan Skarsgard, Michael Rapaport and Jacqueline McKenzie... all of which make likeable fodder for the sharks.
Rapaport in particular is a standout among the supporting actors.




What the film really does do well, is the action, paranoia and practical effects that are used to backup the story... this is where the film really shines.

The CGI work is a little rusty, but the overall practical effects like the technical aspects of the water and flooding corridors, the puppetry work with the sharks and the overall stunt work on behalf of the choreography and stunt players is absolutely top notch. It's on a par with The Abyss tbh, and it's exceptionally well photographed.
It's exciting to watch and is backed up by some really quite spooky set pieces and backdrops...

... it all adds to the flavour of fear that the movie builds quite succesfully. The film also doesn't shy away from the ocassional gory scene either.

There are also some scenes that are really quite jumpy too... even I got caught out a couple of times. Thumbs up!


---


All in all, not perfect... but contains more than a few jumpy bits.
Labelled as a sci-fi horror, I prefer to think of it as a thriller actioner with the odd hint of horror/gore thrown in for good measure. Very exciting in the action and practical effects, believeable backstory too... lacking in overall screenplay or general style though, sadly.

Might be worth a watch though if you like modern sci-fi 'horror'... a half decent film.

My rating: 72%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleR5050StampNew_zps36b9d868.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleR5050StampNew_zps36b9d868.png.html)

[Godoggo]

I like Deep Blue Sea. Of course I do, it's a movie where sharks eat people. :p I didn't mind LL Cool J. His character was cheesy, but I like a little cheese with these types of movies. My main complaint is that the tension should of been built up a little more through out the whole movie.

[The Rodent]

Kind of a special review this one, it's the 60th Anniversary this year, so I'll stick it into the Movie #255 spot...


Review #189, Movie #255
The War Of The Worlds

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/31/Film_poster_The_War_of_the_Worlds_1953.jpg

Year Of Release
1953

Director
Byron Haskin

Producer
George Pal

Writer
Barré Lyndon, H.G Wells

Cast
Gene Barry, Ann Robinson, Lewis Martin, Les Tremayne, Bob Cornthwaite, Henry Brandon Bill Phipps, Jack Kruschen, Paul Frees and Sir Cedric Hardwicke

Notes
The film itself contains masses of Cold War visuals and paranoia laced into the screenplay and storylines... from the atomic bomb, to even having the Martian ships only ever travelling from screen right to screen left... ie; a dangerous force travelling from the East to attack the West.


---


When a meteor lands in Linda Rosa, California, Dr Clayton Forrester who is on vacation there, takes it upon himself to investigate.
At first the whole town is excited by the incident, but go on their way and think nothing more of it... leaving three men by the meteor pit to make sure the burning ball of rock doesn't start any forest fires.

But a few hours later, when the town is having a gathering at the town hall, something sinister emerges from the meteor...



A product of its time... WOTW combines lashings of naive dialogue and cheesie explanatory speeches and captions, experimental storytelling that could almost pass a intentional tongue in cheek humour (though it isn't intentional) with some immensely clever and cutting edge special effects.

One special thing about the 1953 film is the atmosphere that is built over the first two acts.
It manages very succesfully to go from an almost drama like feel to what could only be described as an atmospheric horror... it's cleverly done.

The main thing that lets it down, as I mentioned above, is the unintentional humour involved in the dialogue... some of the acting is also unintentionally funny in places too.

Another let down is the overall changes from thebook to screen. Like with the other WOTW (Spielberg's) review I made on page 6 of this thread, there's little in common with Wells' short novel masterpiece.
It's understandable though for a 1953 film, budget and technology constraints and all that, but they could at least have made something colser to the source material.
There are a couple of plot points that are taken from the book, just not very many really.



Which brings me to the acting.
Gene Barry as Dr Forrester is by far the best on show and to be honest, he's actually really good in the role. A rewritten Narrator, but Barry is incredibly likeable and he actually manages to take the poor script and make it believeable...

Ann Robinson plays the worried faced Sylvia, a love interest for Dr Forrester. Her role really is just that, something for Forrester to protect and pout over. She tends to be completely out of her depth 99% of the time too. Well, she is a woman facing a man's world after all. At one point she even loses it and needs to be shaken and shouted at by Barry... :rolleyes:

The rest of the cast are pretty wooden though. They give a very close performance between them all, they're all consistently wooden, so at least they all tried hard to make Gene Barry look good :D



The effects and hints of action though are really the standout piece of film making though.
Dated by today's standard, but for the timeare extremely exciting. Some of the effects though do hold up today, especially the flying machines themselves.
There's also a number of scenes containing gunfire and explosions on behalf of the armed forces involved in the story. It's all handled pretty well too.

Some of the effects and sound, and some of the visual action is also iconic and has become regarded as classic since though. I agree too, there are lashings of well choreographed and well realised scenes and set pieces throughout.
The general acting though throughout the action is a bit dull though and some of the reactions of the cast and extras to what is happening is questionable.



---


All in all, regarded as a classic and has piles of recognisable features... however the general story is a serious product of its time with the Cold War paranoia. The acting and scripting is pretty poor though.
The good points, exciting action and effects, top notch choreography and photography and filled with a brilliantly spooky and haunting atmosphere.

My rating: 76%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleR5050StampNew_zps36b9d868.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleR5050StampNew_zps36b9d868.png.html)

[The Rodent]

Another special for the 190th... quite a long one this, so bear with me...


Review #190, Movie #256
The Amazing Spider-Man

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/02/The_Amazing_Spider-Man_theatrical_poster.jpeg

Year Of Release
2012

Director
Marc Webb

Producer
Laura Ziskin, Avi Arad, Matt Tolmach

Writer
James Vanderbilt, Alvin Sargent, Steve Kloves

Cast
Andrew Garfield, Emma Stone, Rhys Ifans, Sally Field, Irrfan Khan, Chris Zylka, Dennis Leary and Martin Sheen

Notes
Anne Hathaway was nearly cast as The Black Cat, but instead was cast as Selina Kyle/Catwoman in TDKR.
Garfield has admitted to crying when he first put on the Spidersuit... through joy and pride.
The reason Dennis Leary applied for the role of Captain George Stacy, was because a Spideyfan friend of his thought he really was George Stacy when they first met. It spawned Leary into auditioning.


---


Peter Parker is a bit of an outsider. He has a brilliant mind for science and technology, but all his life he's never really fit in to any group or social situation. His parents vanished when he was a young boy and has been raised by his Uncle Ben and Aunt May...

... when he comes across an old satchel of his Father's that contains a photograph, Peter's curiosity is sparked and he goes in search of a man who is in the picture with his Father.

What he discovers is a scientist called Dr Curt Connors, and Peter sneeks into Connors' Genetics Lab in Oscorp, and ends up getting bitten by a spider...

... but more discovery and tragedy is around the corner, when Uncle Ben ends up in trouble and it appears that Connors has been experimenting on more than just tiny arachnids... and the newly dubbed vigilante Spider-Man is the only person capable of stopping what Connors has created.


Wow. I was extremely dubious about rebooting the Spider-Man franchise so soon after Sam Raimi's attempts.
It's very hard not to compare them really, but what should be taken into account, is that I was wrong to doubt this film.

It's on a par in many ways to, and in some places it's a hell of a lot better, than Raimi's films.


For a start, the overall development of the story and characters feels much more fleshed out.
Peter in particular has been written to be more real than any incarnation before too.

The main thing is the character arcs and general exposition. Some of it is predictable, anyone who knows Spider-Man will know what to expect...


... but most of is feels fresh and original and gives the relatively newly written characters some real depth and vulnerability mixed with strength and confidence. Especially Peter Parker.

His general persona has been tweeked too. He feels more like a real person than just a "guy who is a nerd who gets powers". His reason for taking to the streets is more believable too... hunting for a shadowy figure...


The overall thing with this is that it builds a story and characters that you actually care about... especially when certain tragedies hit. They're all more, well, human.


What works though, is the realistic and darker tone that runs throughout the film. It's not as bright and comicbook looking as Raimi's films and tends to give 'colour' to the film thorugh the characters' personalities and the script writing.

Which brings me to the dialogue. It's very well put together.
It's real, realistic, full of situational and wisecracking humour and has some believable serious tones throughout too.

Another thing, is that the filmmakers haven't tried to cram as much stuff as possible into the 120 minute running time.
It's the beginning of Spider-Man and the background of Peter Parker. Other incarnations have tended to have Peter at school, the next thing he's juggling crime fighting and working at the Bugle... this film is a lead up, a starting point... an origins story.




The acting is also ramped up in this one.
Andrew Garfield as Peter/Spidey is a really good choice. He hasn't tried to emphasise other incarnations of everyone's favourite web-slinger. Garfield holds to the wisecracking and confident side of Spider-Man alongside the relatively rebellious and tortured soul of Peter Parker extremely well. It's definitely a complex role and Garfield does it very well.


Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy is also a perfect piece of casting. Instead of just being a damsel in distress, her character has been tweeked and moulded into a relatively strong, yet fallible love interest for Parker. Stone's chemistry with Garfield and onscreen Father Dennis Leary is also extremely engaging. Stone is fantastic.

Rys Ifans plays Dr Curt Connors. Now, Ifans is brilliant in the role, but Dr Connors himself seems more of a rewritten Norman Osborne from Raimi's film... it's all just too samey really. His overall transformation and character arc is well written though and Ifans shines in the dual personality.

Backup comes from Dennis Leary, Sally Field as Aunt May and Martin Sheen's Uncle Ben is exceptionally likeable... I loved Sheen as Ben.




Now the action and effects. It's easy to say we've seen it all before (Raimi's films), but what the movie isn't, is more of the same.

Amazing really is that. It's exciting, full of great CG effects and combines the realistic darker tones with the humour perfectly and gives the whole film a real grounded feel in the action stakes. It's not all fantastical comicbook OTT action.


With the really likeable characters and acting, it lifts the action to new heights and makes the viewer fix themselves to the screen.

Another thing is Spidey's abilities. He's not just another Raimi Spider-Man who swings through the streets. The overall athletic abilities of the character have been ramped up, and there's even some nice realistic touches added to the abilities, including setting a giant web in the sewers and waiting for something to disturb the strands and coccooning bad guys like a Spider with a Fly...

One thing I was dubious about though, was the loss of natural web slinging and Parker having to build a braclet for his webs. Still though, it's in keeping to the comic and has been utilised really well.


The soundtrack is also heroic, uplifting, spooky at times and is wonderfully fitting for the film.


---


All in all, after initially not liking the film, I've given it another watch and I've found myself actually loving it.
It's exciting, filled with great character writing, fantastic chemistry and some really well pieced together dark tones and humour too. Some of it is laugh out loud and very recognisable.
The backstory is also utilised better than any other incarnation of Spidey and gives real depth of character to the screenplay and characters involved.

Not a superbly fantastic film, but certainly an Amazing film. Bring on the sequel!!

My rating: 95%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[Sexy Celebrity]

I can't deal with it right now. Tobey Maguire is Spiderman.

[The Rodent]

Have you not seen it?

I didn't like it at first as I said but after a rewatch and watching it with my head in place rather than just thinking about Raimi's version, I've found it a really good film.

The 95% rating I gave is the same rating as I gave Spider Man 2 as well. Spidery 1 I only gave 85%...

Amazing is a pretty darn good flick.

[Sexy Celebrity]

I wanted another Spiderman with Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst. No, I have not seen the new one. Like I said, I can't deal with it right now.

[JayDee]

Glad to see you got so much out of Amazing Spidey, Rodent. :up: Also found it a very enjoyable film and I think my review was very much along the same lines. Of course mine was done ages ago so this is old news now! :p

[teeter_g]

I loved that movie 5 !

[mastermetal777]

I absolutely love The Amazing Spider-Man. It honestly made the other films look like they were shot by an amateur (I like 1, I really like 2, I kinda can't stand 3). Definitely the better of the bunch in terms of acting, story, and effects.

[The Rodent]

Review #191, Movie #257
This Boy's Life

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/69/This_Boys_Life.jpg

Year Of Release
1993

Director
Michael Caton-Jones

Producer
Fitch Cady, Art Linson

Writer
Tobias Wolff, Robert Getchell

Cast
Leonardo Di Caprio, Robert De Niro, Ellen Barkin, Jonah Blechman, Eliza Dushku, Carla Gugino, Zack Ansley and Toby Maguire

Notes
This film was Toby Maguire's motion picture debut. He initially auditioned for the lead role but was cast as a friend of the lead instead, with the lead eventually going to Di Caprio.
Even though Di Caprio was nearly 19 years old during filming, he was still a growing boy, and was a few inches taller in some scenes than in in others... causing him to have to slouch in some scenes to preserve continuity.


---


After Caroline Wolff's divorce and a string of failed relationships, she and her son Tobias (Tobi) travel America in the hopes that whatever town they end up in next will bringthem happiness.
Upon arriving in Seattle, Tobias manages once again to get into trouble but along the way, Caroline meets Dwight Hansen, a charming, overly self-made but respected single Father.

At first things go well between Caroline and Dwight, and after an initial cold reception from Tobi, Dwight eventually makes an impression on Tobi...

... until Caroline and Dwight get serious and start talking about marriage, and Tobi ends up spending a few days with Dwight and his children in Concrete, Washington.... and under the false front of wanting to "make Tobi a better person and stop his bad behaviour", Dwight starts abusing Tobi mentally and emotionally...

... but when Caroline and Dwight tie the knot and they all move in together, bully Dwight begins to show his real personality...




Based on the true story of Tobias Wolff (who wrote the original book)... This Boy's Life is a highly engaging and also a highly uncomfortable and borderline disturbing look at the realities of what happens behind closed doors.

For a start, the fact that it's based on reality makes the whole thing much more believable and much more hard hitting.
The screenplay and scripting feels realistic and the sequence of events that lead to the highly charged ending are also developed extremely well.


The character developement is also top notch. The film is based mainly on the character developments rather than just story and script... the arcs of the various characters are incredibly realistic and make the movie.

Dwight in particular has been written fantastically throughout the running time... his persona and the changes it goes through are incredibly recognisable and at times are very disturbing.
I've known people like Dwight's character, and the overal treatment given to the character is incredibly realistic... which I think is what makes it all the more uncomfortable.
Especially when he uses mundane and regular everday things to use as ammo to pick on Tobi. Even stealing Tobi's paper-round money and using the excuse that he's "saving" it for him for the future.




Which brings me to the acting.
De Niro as Dwight... wow. His mood changes and general swing in attitude from one scene to the next is fantastic. He also gives an incredibly realistic take on the almost psychotic side of the character.
His chemistry, good and bad, with anyone on screen with him is awesome, especially though when he's up against Di Caprio's rebellious side.

Ellen Barkin is also good as Caroline. She becomes more of a background as the film progresses... still though, her small role is pivotal and used well.

Leonardo Di Caprio stands out though obviously as Tobias... his overall development is very realistic and very recognisable. Di Caprio absolutely shines as the 1950s problem child with genuine problems. His general attitude is also top notch, especially in the third act when Tobi begins to genuinely rebel against Dwight.
He plays off De Niro brilliantly too.

Back up comes from Eliza Dushku, Carla Gugino, Zack Ansley as Dwight's children and Jonah Blechman makes a memorable appearance as a rather effeminate friend of Tobi's.




---


All in all, not a great film... it's a brilliantly realistic film. The overall character development and overall storytelling mixed with some awesome acting from Di Caprio and De Niro makes the film an absolute must see. I've seen similar circumstances in real life and can honestly say, this film is by far the closest take on the subject matter of abusive parents.
Highly recognisable in terms of script sequence too...

A very well made drama.

My rating: 94%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[mastermetal777]

Rodent praising Leo DiCaprio? Never thought I'd see the day!!! :p Either way, another great review. Never seen the movie, but it seems like a great one to watch one of these days.

[The Rodent]

Currently watching this on telly...

Review #192, Movie #258
Skyline

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5b/Skyline_Poster.jpg

Year Of Release
2010

Director
The Brothers Strause

Producer
The Brothers Strause, Kristian Andresen, Liam O'Donnell, Brett Ratner

Writer
Joshua Cordes, Liam O'Donnell

Cast
Eric Balfour, Scottie Thompson, Brittany Daniel, David Zayas, Crystal Reed, Neil Hopkins and Donald Faison

Notes
Yet another product of Clone Wars... Skyline went head to head with Battle: Los Angeles... but this war was taken to the courts by Sony Pictures.
Hydraulx Filmz, the special effects company owned by The Brothers Strause, worked on both Skyline and Battle: Los Angeles... but Sony wasn't informed about Skyline by Greg and Colin Strause... Sony accused the Strause's of using resources gained from working with Sony, without their consent.
The accusations were later dropped, after Sony realised that no special effects used in Battle, were used in Skyline.


---


When hypnotic blue lights appear over Los Angeles, a small group of 30-somethings have to hide and run from what appears to be an alien invasion.
When it transpires that the aliens are an almost all powerful force... the survivors must find a new way of escaping this new threat to humanity.



Bit of an odd one this. What could have been great, sadly is just a badly written and acted bog standard alien sci-fi film.

Plus there are piles and piles of reused/stolen ideas from other sci-fi films, books and stories, just packaged in new effects blankets...

... there's been many references from other Critics etc, to Transformers, Cloverfield and Independence Day...

... but I spotted ideas from Spielberg's War Of The Worlds, The Matrix Trilogy, Terminator Salvation and District 9...
Even the brain removal thing reminded me of Starship Troopers.

Bad form.

The general character writing is poor too. There's little to keep the attention of the viewer, the characters involved are written so one dimensionally that they came across to me as just shallow, money-oriented It People... basically the kind of people that everyone hates.

Even the scripting and dialogue is poorly written. The various arguments between the main couple of characters and their reasons for arguing are laughable. Shall we stay, shall we run kinda arguments and it's all so completely unrealistic, it becomes unintentionally funny.

The storyline and general plot are, basically, all based around what can be achieved with CGI... and like I said, if you've seen any of the films I mentioned above, you've seen it all before. I mean, even Transformers had a better plotline tbh...
There's also pretty bad writing throughout in terms of Humanity's reactions to the alien invasion...

... when the aliens attack, the military sees fit to immediately use Nukes... I mean, really? So soon? Without enough time to deliberate whether or not they should be used over American soil?

Come on... really?



As for the acting.
The best on show is Eric Balfour... he holds the role together well and seems comfortable in the action... but he does slip from time to time and seems out of his depth when he has to actually act tough.

Backup comes from Scottie Thompson, Brittany Daniel, David Zayas, Crystal Reed, Neil Hopkins and Donald "Scrubs" Faison.

All of whom are pretty wooden throughout and recite their lines as if they haven't had enough time to rehearse them... even Faison, an actor I like, is completely off form and wooden.



The effects are top notch though. They're extremely well rendered and realistic. They're also highly stylised...

However, sadly, with most of the effects shots looking like something stolen from Transformers, Cloverfield, Independence Day, Spielberg's War Of The Worlds, The Matrix Trilogy, Terminator Salvation and District 9 and Starship Troopers, it makes the whole film just feel cheap.



---


All in all... not very original, not very exciting for a thriller-actioner... not well acted at all...
Fans of CGI will like it, but then again if you're a fan of CGI films, or, well any films really, you'll spot the many many reused ideas a mile off.

Worth a look for the effects rendering only.

My rating: 7%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRejectedStampNew_zpsad11e9b5.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRejectedStampNew_zpsad11e9b5.png.html)

[JayDee]

Ouch! Another kicking for Skyline. I do own the DVD but I didn't actually buy it. It was gifted to me by a friend but not with the best of recommendations. A friend of hers initially blind bought it and hated it so pawned it off to my friend. She then watched it, hated it and pawned it off on me! :D

Don't think I've ever heard of This Boy's Life. Sounds quite interesting though I'm not sure it's one I'd go hunting for anytime soon.

[Sexy Celebrity]

I love This Boy's Life. I reviewed it last year and gave it 5.

I need to get the book.

[The Rodent]

@JayDee:
Have you watched Skyline then? You're not missing much if you haven't.


This Boy's Life is brilliantly uncomfortable viewing.
Excellent film and worth a watch.
Tbh, I'd rent it first or use online rather than buying it straight out, it's not everyone's sort of film, even though it's very well made.


@SC: I haven't read the book... only seen the film... wouldn't mind reading it tbh.

[Sexy Celebrity]

This is my review of This Boy's Life:

http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=826572

[The Rodent]

I remember it now... I've repped it.

This is weird though... on that same page, is your review of Color Of Night... I'm watching that right now on telly.

[Sexy Celebrity]

There are no coincidences.

I love Color of Night.

[The Rodent]

Only because of Bruce's Willis

[Godoggo]

I really like This Boy's Life. Haven't seen it in years though

Yes, Skyline is a piece of crap. I wouldn't have minded the heavy borrowing from other movies so much if it had been at least slightly entertaining. I don't know if I've ever seen an alien invasion movie that was so boring.

[The Rodent]

Right... here it is. Enjoy.


Review #193, Movie #259-263
X-Men... The Franchise So Far

X-Men

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8c/XMen1poster.jpg

Year Of Release
2000

Director
Bryan Singer

Producer
Lauren Shuler Donner, Ralph Winter

Writer
David Hayter, Tom DeSanto, Bryan Singer

Notes
X-Men had its fair share of ups and downs before and during filming.

It had been in development since 1989, with none other than James Cameron and the now defunct Carolco Pictures.

After a number of rewrites and getting shelved several times, the film rights were given to 20th Century Fox in 1994, eventually gaining Bryan Singer in 1996 as director. After more rewrites pushed the start date back and back and back, filming eventually started in September 1999, 10 years after initial film conception.

Also, Russell Crowe was first choice to play Wolverine, but greedy demands from Crowe meant they couldn’t afford his salary.
Dougray Scott was then cast as Wolverine, but he then backed out nearly a month after filming had started in favour of Mission: Impossible 2.

Eventually, then-unknown actor Hugh Jackman stepped into the role 3 weeks after filming had actually started.

The initial acting line up overall was also very different. Janet Jackson as Storm, Terrence Stamp as Magneto and James Caviezel was first choice to play Cyclops.
Even after all these stops and starts and casting problems, Fox then dropped the filmmakers in trouble again by pulling the release date forward nearly 6 months from Christmas 2000 to July 2000, in competition with other films on the market… meaning Singer only had 6 months to actually make the film.

---

Logan is a drifter. He has little memory of his life before and uses his “special skills” to earn money by fighting in various underground boxing matches… He also has little to care about and his more animalistic side tends to take over his mentality toward those around him, causing him to have become a bit of a loner too.
But during a chance meeting with a young innocent runaway called Marie, he ends up in the presence of Professor Xavier at a boarding school for “gifted” children.

When it appears that Xavier is more than he seems too, Logan reluctantly (and with a bit of attitude too) stays at the school, and learns that the “gifted” children including runaway Marie, are actually mutants… just like Logan.

But when a new threat appears on the horizon in the form of a man calling himself Magneto who has delusions of an “equal world”, Logan and his new found friends in Xavier, Storm, Scott and Jean must band together, and Logan himself must, for the first time he can remember, rely on those around him as it appears the he is the target of this new enemy.

But worse things are around the corner for Xavier’s X-Men, when it appears that he was wrong about whom Magneto’s target actually is.

---

Ok, it was always going to be hard to start a film series based on X-Men.
But the filmmakers, even with all the problems have managed to piece together a pretty good story for the beginning of the series.

The screenplay and general scripting is pretty simplistic and the overall exposition is pretty linear… but the small twist in the third act makes for a nice surprise.
But what really does work is the audience-character connections.

Using the comics as inspiration, they’ve made a genuine cast of characters that you really care about.
Even the bad guys (Magneto’s group) have a real likeable air to them, especially the fact that you can see why they have broken away from conventional thinking and are doing what they’re doing, even if at times you don’t agree with it, you can at least see their reasoning.
They’re all very “human” when it comes to the writing aspect of the characteristics of everyone’s favourite mutants.

Another thing that stands out is that the filmmakers have incorporated a pretty realistic air of persecution and friendship between the human and mutant factions, as I mentioned with the reasoning behind Magneto’s actions.

It makes for, at times, almost a political fantasy that even Lucas would have been proud to have in Star Wars Episode I. But he didn’t :D

One thing that could be pointed out as a fault though, is that being the first of its kind, the film feels almost experimental in some of the tonal balances and some of the peril that the characters are going through, almost along the same lines as Superman: The Movie.
Some of X-Men however, feels kind of half-hearted toward the end and put in for the sake of getting a few action shots.
Especially when we are seeing the characters powers, but for the sake of anyone not up on the comics, it does work well and gives an idea of what these characters are capable of.

Another thing is the dialogue writing.
Throughout it’s really very good… but there are one or two slips that are immensely cheesy and almost cringe worthy in terms of wooden writing… one line in particular is between Storm and Toad… watch and you’ll see.


The acting however is bang on the money.
Hugh Jackman is absolutely the right choice for the job. His gruff, roguh and tough persona shines through brilliantly and Jackman’s natural talent is perfect for the changing characteristic of Wolverine as he becomes just a little softer as the movie progresses.
Patrick Stewart is also on form. I always like seeing Stewart but Xavier is by far one of his best roles. Stewarts natural ability to play a father figure is perfect for the role.

Halle Berry is a surprise as Storm though. It’s definitely her best role to date and she’s almost unrecognisable as the lightning charged babe.

A stand out role is Famke Janssen as Jean Grey, a love interest for Jackman and James Marsden who plays Cyclops.
Janssen is seriously likeable and plays off both her on screen love interests brilliantly.

Which brings me to James Marsden as Cyclops. One of my least favourite characters yet Marsden makes the role. Sadly though, he’s not given much of an arc or story really, he’s more of a supporting role.

Ian McKellen is by far the most impressive though. He has a genuinely realistic edge to him when it comes to threat and his chemistry on screen with anyone he’s seen with is awe inspiring. He’s also incredibly confident within the character. Outside of Gandalf, it’s another best role for X-Men.

Anna Paquin as Marie/Rogue is a bit of a hit and miss though. She’s seen throughout and is key to the story, but in act two she’s barely utilised.

Back up comes from Ray Park, Shawn Ashmore and Rebecca Romijn-Stamos makes for a beautiful femme-fatale.
Tyler Mane makes a notable showing as Sabretooth too but sadly he isn’t utilised as much as most fans, including myself, would have liked.


The action and effects are, like I said a touch experimental to allow the audience an idea of certain powers and so on…

… but they’re still very well rendered in the computers and the practical effects are great too.
The choreography is also top notch, especially in the third act. The fisticuffs between the various characters is really engaging.

I can’t help but feel it could have been just a little bit bigger. Still though, it’s apt for a starting point for the franchise.


---


All in all, not perfect, but a pretty good starting point for what became a series of films…

… slightly touch and go in some departments expecially some of the dialogue but the choreography and the general aura of the story, including the character arcs and “political” reasoning for the story development seen throughout make the movie a must see.

My rating: 84%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)


X2
X-Men 2
X2: X-Men United

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3e/X2_poster.jpg

Year Of Release
2003

Director
Bryan Singer

Producer
Lauren Shuler Donner, Ralph Winter

Writer
Michael Dougherty, Dan Harris, David Hayter, Bryan Singer, Zak Penn

Notes
As with X-Men, problems hit X2 hard and fast. The success of X-Men pushed Fox into hammering money into X2, and again, they gave very little time for the filmmakers to get the film done.

Writers David Hayter and Zak Penn wrote two separate scripts for X2… eventually two new writers were brought in in the forms of Michael Dougherty and Dan Harris, and all four along with Singer then combined the best parts of each script into one screenplay.

Once again though, the filmmakers were given around 6 months to make the film, during which time nearly 70 sets needed to be built and locations scouted… which also gave problems as some of the locations used, especially with the dodgy weather conditions, weren’t ideal for what the director and producers wanted.

Not just the production had problems either; even the rewrites had problems approaching the filming start date. Many of the characters were rewritten to give extra screen time, including Storm, and new characters added/rewritten, including Lady Deathstrike… and with barely enough time left to actually make the film, a number of characters had to then be deleted and the scripts rewritten once again, which sadly meant Sabretooth was written out.

---

A short time after X-Men, Logan has returned from a soul finding trip and it has transpired that Magneto has involuntarily given information about Xavier’s school and about the people who live and work there… to a man called Stryker.

Using a new weapon, Stryker has the ability to control mutants and his plan is to use certain devices of Xavier’s as an even more powerful weapon, to kill mutants outright.
It also transpires that Logan has a history with Stryker, but Logan still can’t remember anything about his life from years ago.

Xavier’s X-Men unite with Magneto and his “Brothers” to do what they can to discover what Stryker is up to and the history between him and Logan… but it will cost them dearly in doing so.

---

Where to begin?
Ok, X2 ramps up the stakes, and rightly so especially after the excitement of the first film.

This time round having new writers has given more substance to the political side of things and has ramped up the action stakes too.

One thing that stands out more than before is also Magneto and Xavier’s relationship. It gives a real personal and emotional depth to proceedings and makes for much more enjoyable twists and turns throughout the running time.

The things that made the story special in the first film are still there too, Magneto’s reasoning for his actions, Xavier’s reasoning for stopping him etc.
But with more character arcs added to the mix, an expansion in Wolverine’s background, and more screen time and storylines for those that were just supporting roles in the first film, it makes for a more interesting storyline overall that is more character driven.

The added bonus is that you never know what Magneto and his group are up to… even when he and the X-Men join forces against a mutual enemy.

The overall dialogue writing has also been improved. There much less in terms of cheesiness and the more serious notes have been thought through and tweaked into something that is much more believable.

Another thing is that more humour throughout has also been incorporated too.

The acting is also improved throughout and the cast seem to be having much more fun and a freer rein with the roles.

This time round, Anna Paquin and Shawn Ashmore (Rogue and Iceman respectively) as a kind of troubled love story is a wonderfully realised piece of writing. Seeing them on screen more is also a nice touch, they’re very likeable.

We’re also treated to Pyro played by Aaron Stanford. His feud with Iceman is another nice touch and gives Paquin and Ashmore something to watch out for. He also has massive chemistry with McKellen and Romijn-Stamos which is key to his role throughout the films.

Brian Cox makes a great showing as his usual bad guy persona. He plays Stryker and is definitely a bad guy to really loathe. As usual with Cox, he’s memorable beyond belief.

The real standout role this time round though is chameleon actor Alan Cumming as Kurt Wagner/Nightcrawler.
He is incredible in the role of the God-fearing Teleporter and steals the show whenever he’s on screen. His makeup is also fantastic.

Back up comes from Kelly Hu, Katie Stuart and Daniel Cudmore makes a kind of cameo as Colossus.


The action, choreography and effects are also improved throughout, especially with the third act showdown.
We get to see Wolverine come head to head with an almost equal and throughout the running time there’s more explosive action when it comes to the feud between humans and mutants… then there’s a wonderfully realised and sombre ending to the film as well.

The effects rendering, both practical and CG is also top notch.


---


All in all, improved but still not perfect, though more exciting and better written in terms of backstory and general exposition too.
The overall characters’ storylines being opened and more screen time for what were supporting roles is also a welcome improvement.
The twists and turns throughout are also well written.

My rating: 87%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)


X-Men: The Last Stand

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/56/X-Men_The_Last_Stand.jpg

Year Of Release
2006

Director
Brett Ratner

Producer
Lauren Shuler Donner, Ralph Winter, Avi Arad

Writer
Simon Kinberg, Zak Penn

Notes
Another problem hit production, Last Stand lost director Singer who left in favour of Superman Returns (idiot), but not before he and his team of X2 writers partially completed a script… what made things more complicated, was that Hugh Jackman was then given the task of approving a director, yes really!

Jackman offered the director’s chair to Darren Aronofski, who turned it down.
Rob Bowman, Alex Proyas and Zack Snyder were also approached by Jackman… eventually Matthew Vaughn was signed up… but he too then dropped out during production.
Brett Ratner, who was originally considered to direct the first X-Men film, then stepped in, but only with Jackman’s approval of course.

After Ratner came aboard though, he had what little script there was rewritten over a dozen times… all the time the production team were trying to get everything else organised.

To add insult to injury, James Marsden (Cyclops) also left the project to join previous director Bryan Singer on Superman Returns (that makes two idiots)… Fox then ordered more rewrites for the filmmakers to explain Cyclops’ absence.
Alan Cumming (Nightcrawler) also dropped out due to lack of screen time and overly long makeup scheduling for his character.

Again though, all the deliberating left very little time to make the film, many more new characters that were going to be part of the film were either rewritten into existing characters or deleted from the film and put into the screenplay for X-Men Origins: Wolverine instead.
Eventually, the filmmakers were again left with barely 6 months to make the film… and after all the trouble and upheaval, X-Men: The Last Stand became the most expensive film made of all time up until that point. This was then overtaken by the budget for Singer’s critical flop Superman Returns.

---

A while after X2, Logan has found himself feeling at home in Xavier’s school. He’s now affectionately known a Professor Logan by the children and is looked up to by most people around him. His attitude still makes problems from time to time though.
His relationship with Scott Summers is still strained though, especially in the aftermath of what happen in X2.

When it appears that the incidents in X2 were more than they seemed, Scott goes missing… and Storm and Logan go in search… only to find a rather sizeable surprise waiting for them.
But this surprise turns out to be much more dangerous that they expected when Magneto shows up and sees an opportunity to wield the ultimate weapon…

… a weapon that will allow him to wipe out human kind forever before humans wipe out mutants by using a cure against them.

The X-Men must preserve democracy and forge peace between humans and mutants…
… by fighting Magneto, side by side with the very humans that were going to wipe them out.

---

Yet again, with the new writers on board, the franchise has been tweaked and ramped up.
This time round a new director has had a massive effect on the finished product… and in a good way too.

The film feels more complete this time round, even with the rewrites and problems.

The character arcs are also much more fleshed out and feel much more personal this time round and give a massively entertaining air to the film.

The humour of the second film has been toned back slightly for this one in favour of a more serious tone but the filmmakers have also managed to add a huge comic book essence to the look of the film.
I have a feeling this is down to having Avi Arad (The Amazing Spider-Man) on board as a producer, this guy seems to know his way around the comic to film genre.

It makes what became a trilogy, tie together perfectly too.

One thing with this film is that there are at least some scenes that allow the audience see why certain characters aren’t involved anymore, particularly Cyclops.
In X2, there were missing characters that were just, well, not there, and that’s it. Gone.
This time round, some of the absentees are accounted for and explained.

Another plus point though, is the emotions that the whole cast seem to go through that harkens back to X2, plus a few shocks along the way that give the actors something to get their teeth into.
Some of the writing in particular with Magneto is tweaked as well. You really get to see how ruthless this guy can be. Thumbs up!

Mix all that with better photography overall, makes it a much more visually stunning film.


As for the acting, well this time round we have a number of new characters who are treated as either cannon fodder or supporting members… but one thing is that they’re all utilised extremely well to give a history to the characters around them.
Also, the many, many new mutants on show get to show off their powers too in a third act showdown.
New member Vinnie Jones as Juggernaut is a welcome addition. He carries a number of humorous scenes and his overall character isn’t too complicated either.

Ellen Page also makes a nice show as Kitty Pride, a girl who can walk through walls. She also carries some humour and makes for a nice love triangle between her, Rogue and Iceman.

The biggest welcome is Kelsey Grammer though as Hank “Beast” McCoy. Definitely a standout role. His cool calm exterior plays second only to his more aggressive side when he gets fed up with Magneto’s shenanigans and decides to get an X-Men suit on… and Kelsey plays against type fantastically.

Back up comes from a new faction of mutants with Dania Ramirez, Meiling Melancon and Ken Leung.


The effects are about the same as X2 though in terms of rendering and style, but with the occasional addition of extra computer effects where the other films would have gone practical, it makes for a more visually exciting film.
The action and fighting choreography is also ramped up. The third act rumble is by far the most exciting sequence of the original trilogy, especially when there’s such a good story backing it up.


---


All in all, better writing, better character driven stories and sub-plots, some great character arcs and the slightly toned down humour with the more serious tones make for an exciting end to the original trilogy.

Though still not perfect, it’s the best of the trilogy, and well worthy of the X-Men title.

My rating: 89%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)


X-Men Origins: Wolverine

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/ec/X-Men_Origins_Wolverine.jpg

Year Of Release
2009

Director
Gavin Hood

Producer
Lauren Shuler Donner, Hugh Jackman, Ralph Winter, John Palermo

Writer
David Benioff, Skip Woods

Notes
Zack Snyder was again approached to direct but dropped out of negotiations to direct Watchmen, Bryan Singer and Brett Ratner were snubbed, even though both showed interest in returning to the franchise. Len Wiseman and Alexandre Aja also showed interest but weren’t considered. Eventually a new director was brought in, Gavin Hood.

Yet again though, Fox caused trouble for the franchise after new director Hood came aboard and they immediately came to loggerheads over the tone of the film with Wolverine suffering apparent stress disorders after being in so many wars… Richard Donner himself, husband of producer Lauren Shuler Donner, actually flew out to Australia to settle the dispute.

Hugh Jackman then had the production halted/slowed when he had to promote his film Australia… Ryan Reynolds also slowed production as he was working on two other films at the time as well.

After a comic book fan, David Benioff, was hired to write the script, another writer, Skip Woods, was then hired to rewrite.
Eventually, most of the characters that were omitted from X-Men, X2 and X-Men: The Last Stand were written into Wolverine permanently… but not without more controversy when Sabretooth was set to return but with Liev Schreiber in the role instead of X-Men original cast member Tyler Mane.
James Vanderbilt and Scott Silver were also attached to rewrite, but the Writers Guild Strike put another spanner in the works for the film.

What was different though about Wolverine is that the filmmakers started filming over a year before the release date. This gave plenty of time to get shots needed, action sequences filmed, sets built and script rewrites completed.

---

In 1845, a young boy around the age of 10 called James Howlett discovers the disturbing truth that his father isn’t his real father and that a good school friend of his called Victor, is actually his brother.
During this emotional discovery, he and his newly discovered brother end up wanted for murder and they go on the run… vowing to protect each other and keep each other’s bizarre powers secret.

As time goes on, the two find themselves fighting many wars, always watching each other’s backs.

But when a particular incident that shows their strange powers for what they are, it brings the attention of a young Government Agent called Stryker…

… Stryker then invites the duo to fight for a shadowy, almost Black Ops organisation.

But James, who now uses the name Logan, begins to doubt that their activities are purely for good and it drives a wedge between him and Victor…

In leaving the organisation though, Logan has made himself a genuine enemy of his brother… and using Stryker’s help, Logan is given a power beyond his imagination to be able to stop Victor… who is seemingly out for the blood of everyone who was in the “organisation”.

---

A bit of an odd one this.
Wolverine has a pretty good story behind it and some great action sequences.

There’s more humour to this one at the beginning, especially between Logan, Victor and the new team of mutants they’re joined with.
After the initial humorous start though and the odd funny scene thrown in throughout the running time, it has quite a depressing air about it. It’s a very sombre and serious turn of events that lead to the “birth” of the Wolverine we all know from the original trilogy.

The kinds of twists and turns that made the original trilogy’s screenplay so good are laid on thick in this one too and they’re gladly easy to follow. It makes for a pretty unpredictable movie and makes it more enjoyable too.


Another thing that’s laid on thick is a sub-plot that was used throughout the original trilogy… experiments on mutants.
This film is a culmination of all the various already seen experimentation, which made the other films so disturbing at times. It’s also handled pretty well too.


The dialogue in this one is about the same as before too but what’s special about this film, is that Logan is a completely different character overall.

What is missing from this one though, I think, is the more character driven sub-plots and side stories. Though with this being the origins of Wolverine, the movie does succeed in what it set out to do

What is good though, is seeing the things that Logan had forgotten in the original trilogy. The backstory that was missing from Logan’s memories… and it’s nice to see some of the olde connections that Logan has with Stryker and Sabretooth.

Another nice touch is a bunch of cameos from young actors playing mutants that we will all recognise from the original trilogy… and a small role for the mutant called Emma Frost who will be seen in more detail in X-Men: First Class.

What lets it down though, is that the film has an air about it that makes it feel like a film that was made for the sake of it.
Even though all of the above work well, the film feels a little hollow. Almost as if there could have been something better about it during the preproduction stages that weren’t included in the final product.
There are also some continuity errors in regard to the original trilogy during the running time too.


The acting and character writing is what really brings the film to life.
Hugh Jackman returns as Logan/Wolverine. This time round the more serious tone of the character is brought into the foreground and Jackman nails it.

Victor/Sabretooth this time round is played by Liev Schreiber… Schreiber was a bit of a controversial pick to start with over Tyler Mane, but the new actor is by far a better choice.
Given the extra screen time, Victor needed a strong actor to make the character come to life and Schreiber is absolutely on form. He’s also one of the best villains going in the X-Men films.

Danny Huston makes a mark too as a young version of Brian Cox’s Stryker. Huston is fantastic as the slimy government type with an agenda.

Taylor Kitsch also makes a nice showing as Gambit too. He has a kind of dual role throughout as an enemy and then friend to Logan.

Back up comes from Will.i.am, Dominic Monaghan, Kevin Durand and Ryan Reynolds makes a seriously memorable appearance too.
Reynolds in particular is funny at the start.


The effects, fights and choreography though are what this film is really all about.
The rendering of the effects, CGI and practical are absolutely wonderful and some of the action sequences are seriously some of the best of the series so far.
Jackman in particular carries the action fantastically too.


---


All in all, the weakest of the films so far in terms of overall storytelling.
Wolverine has a number of fantastic set pieces and great effects… sadly it feels rushed and has a lot of continuity problems.

Still though, it’s worthy of a place in the franchise and is still an entertaining action film that delivers the general story that it wanted to.

My rating: 81%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)


X-Men: First Class

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/55/X-MenFirstClassMoviePoster.jpg

Year Of Release
2011

Director
Matthew Vaughn

Producer
Lauren Shuler Donner, Bryan Singer, Simon Kinberg, Gregory Goodman

Writer
Ashley Edward Miller, Zack Stentz, Jane Goldman, Matthew Vaughn, Sheldon Turner, Bryan Singer

Notes
After a number of rewrites based on the original comic history, First Class went into production later than planned due to the same Writers Guild Strike that put a Hex on Wolverine.

Initially, Ian McKellen was going to play Magneto using the CG facelift seen in X-Men: The Last Stand… but after more rewrites, the filmmakers decided on a full on recasting of the movie.

Another thing was that writer Simon Kinberg’s idea to change the overall backstory of the characters. The film bears little resemblance to the comic book backgrounds.
Simon Kinberg was the man behind the idea to use First Class initially too. But with the original storylines being close to other movie franchises, Kinberg wanted to steer clear of already well used ideas and decided to rewrite the history of the story and make a kind of ensemble of mutants with highly visual powers.

One thing with the writing and rewriting is that it stepped all over what would have been another film called X-Men Origins: Magneto.
With First Class being what it is, basically an Origins Story for Magneto, Xavier, Mystique and so on, Origins: Magneto will never get made… much to the chagrin of Magneto writer Sheldon Turner.

But, with the new script and character history and replacing Singer as director with Matthew Vaughn (who initially wasn’t even considered by the studios after he dropped X-Men: The Last Stand into trouble), the filming went ahead 9 months before release, but with the masses of effects shots and long scheduling for filming itself, filming eventually finished barely a couple of weeks before the release date.

---

Charles Xavier is a young boy born into a highly wealthy family with an incredible gift. He has the power to read minds and can even control people’s thoughts. When he takes in a runaway called Raven Darkholme who can shape-shift, they form a close bond that resembles a sibling ship.

Xavier eventually ends up in University studying and mastering mutations in living things, and he Raven are approached by CIA Agent Moira MacTaggert who needs Xavier’s particular expertise on the subject after she witnessed what appeared to be a group of mutants lead by a man called Sebastian Shaw, blackmailing top Military brass.

During their work together in discovering who these so called Mutants are, Xavier, Raven and MacTaggert encounter Eric Lensherr, a mutant with the power to control metal.
Lensherr has been hunting Shaw, as he is responsible for the death of Lensherr’s family…

… and together with a few new recruits to Xavier and Lensherr’s First Class, they must train together and refine their powers… and find out what these mutants want with the Military bosses… and why they’re so interested in Nuclear weapons.

But with metal controlling Lensherr, now dubbed as “Magneto”becoming so powerful, he ends up bent solely on revenge rather than the good of mankind and Xavier and his team of newly dubbed X-Men, which includes Raven “Mystique” Darkholme, Hank “Beast” McCoy, Alex “Havoc” Summers, Angel Salvadore and Sean “Banshee” Cassidy, must work around each other’s differing ideals and work together to stop Shaw in whatever way they can.

---

Ok, let’s start with the bad.
More continuity errors plague First Class more than they ever did with the other films.

The overall relationship between Xavier and Lensherr and Xavier’s relationships with certain other mutants and a continuity error in the circumstances of Xavier ending up in a wheelchair are all part of a pretty large iceberg of faults than run through the film.

Also, Xavier’s physical appearance is a continuity problem too… he’s seen at the end of Origins: Wolverine before his accident… yet bears no resemblance to James McAvoy in this film.


Now, on with the good parts.
The story itself is fantastic. It’s a highly engaging and stunning look at the history of X-Men.
Also, the best way to think of First Class is as an Origins story.

The overall character development given to everyone’s favourite mutant leaders really brings home the struggles they faced as younger men.
It makes for yet another highly personal turn of events that fleshes out the mentality of the characters and gives a real substance to what is seen in the original X-Men trilogy. In retrospect, it freshens the original trilogy.

The other thing is the overall exposition of the story and plot. Some of it is predictable because of seeing the original films, yet with the odd tweak and twist with some of the plot devices, it gives the occasional unexpected surprise to the proceedings.

There’s also some fantastic dialogue and audience-character connections going on throughout too that make the viewer laugh along with some of the scenes… kind of in a nostalgic way.

This film also balances humour and seriousness better than the other films. Anywhere from slapstick to subtle dialogue to nuclear threats and fistfights… the whole thing has pretty much the best parts of all the films before it with none of the unintentional cheesiness.


The acting, I wasn’t too keen on to start with, but after another viewing I came to like the new actors in the roles.
James McAvoy as Xavier is pretty much bang on. The overall character of Xavier has been tweaked and McAvoy makes the role his own without having to copy what Patrick Stewart did.

Michael Fassbender also makes an impression as a young Eric Lensherr/Magneto. In particular Magneto has been given a massive amount of backstory and like with the original trilogy, whether you agree with his actions or not, you understand why he does what he does.
Fassbender does occasionally slip between different accents though.

Jennifer Lawrence plays young Raven Darkholme/Mystique… the shape shifter whose alliances are torn. She’s also expanded as a character rather than just being a baddie for the sake of it. Lawrence is also just as beautiful as original actress Rebecca Romijn too.

CIA Agent Moira MacTaggert is also a nice addition from actress Rose Byrne. She’s not used a massive amount but her key role works as a plot developer and a love interest for McAvoy.

Kevin Bacon almost steals the show though as Sebastian Shaw. Though the character wasn’t brilliantly utilised, Bacon as usual steals the screen when he’s on. His overall slimy persona is also brilliant for the character.

Back up comes from:
January Jones as Emma Frost… Frost too has more of an important role than she had in Wolverine.
Nicholas Hoult as Hank “Beast” McCoy… who makes a good turn as a young Kelsey Grammer.
And Zoe Kravitz, Caleb Landry Jones, Lucas Till and Edi Gathegi make memorable shows as Professor Xavier’s First Class.

A standout background performance though is Jason Flemyng as Azazel. Though he isn’t utilised a massive amount.


The effects of this one are also ramped up. They’re used sparingly rather than just becoming an all-out actioner like Wolverine was and when used, the excitement doesn’t disappoint.

The rendering of the CGI is also top notch and mixed with the brilliant set pieces, the movie really comes together.

A lot of the mutants on show in this one, as I said in the Notes section above, are highly visual but with the audience connection being so well put together it makes the whole thing much more enjoyable than just flash for the sake of it effects.


---


All in all, if it wasn’t for the continuity errors, First Class could have been the best of the lot… the story overall is entertaining, the action utilised brilliantly and the character development is fantastic.

Sadly though, the continuity lets it down. Better than Wolverine, but not as good as the original trilogy.
Still a rip roaring almost nostalgic adventure though, and well worth a watch.

My rating: 82%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[JayDee]

Damn Rodent! :eek: I had actually been meaning to ask you what was going on with your reviews as I felt this was your longest ever break. Now I guess I've got the answer.

I'm actually just about to head out with the dog but will definitely have a read through later on. Although just having a quick skim through and you rate Last Stand as the best of the series?!!! :eek: I'd put that as my least favourite probably. The second film and First Class probably as my top entries in the franchise.

[teeter_g]

That is one doozy of a review Rode! I enjoyed all of those movies! Wouldn't have dreamed of writing that long of a review, as you can tell by my reviews page, but none-the-less you are the king of reviews! :king: :)

[teeter_g]

I actually enjoyed Skyline. It kept me interested, I enjoyed figuring out what was going to happen before it actually did. ;)

[Daniel M]

Wow, massive post there Rodent and some great reviews. Out of those, I remember enjoying the first two X-Men films when they came out even though some didn't. I've seen First Class a couple times and I didn't really like it the first time but it did improve the second time, although I didn't enjoy it as much as other people on here did, had negatives and positives for me, liked Fassbender as Magneto though.

[JayDee]

but none-the-less you are the king of reviews! :king: :)

Woah woah woah!!! :eek: Hold on a minute. When exactly was this established? Was their an official tournament for said title that I missed or something? :p

[nebbit]

Nice reviews Own all these :yup:

[The Rodent]

Cheers everyone for the reps and nice replies. Took me a while to get those done.

I know my way around the keyboard now :D


King Of Reviews... that has to go on my caption just to make JayDee jealous.

I reckon JayDee should do something similar then. I've review whole franchises in a whole post before but I made them short reviews for each film. This time they were long.
So I reckon JayDee should do a whole franchise too with long reviews for each one... Mission Impossible... Lethal Weapon... Star Wars... Pirates Of The Caribbean... Alien...

Pick one JayDee, I can't remember if you've done any of those :D

You could be the Prince Of Reviews.

[JayDee]

King Of Reviews... that has to go on my caption just to make JayDee jealous.

:furious: Oh Yoda, why did you have to take the negative rep option away? Rodent really needs taken down a peg or two right about now!!! :p

Well perhaps I should use cinemaafficionado's comment as my caption when he said my review was 'truly Oscar worthy'. JayDee - Writer of Oscar level reviews. ;)

I reckon JayDee should do something similar then. I've review whole franchises in a whole post before but I made them short reviews for each film. This time they were long.
So I reckon JayDee should do a whole franchise too with long reviews for each one... Mission Impossible... Lethal Weapon... Star Wars... Pirates Of The Caribbean... Alien...


Well I did do the Lord of the Rings trilogy a few months back. And I probably wrote more for just 3 films than you did for 5 if you're so desperate to boast about how much you wrote! :p The only thing with franchises is I think you'd end up talking about the same things over and over again. Like when I did the Mission Impossible series I just did micro musings, otherwise every review would just have been a carbon copy in a number of ways

[The Rodent]

Do Star Trek 1-11 in one review... I did... :D

[The Rodent]

This has been repeated on TV the past few days, used to have it on DVD too.


Review #194, Movie #264
Vertical Limit

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8d/Vertical_Limit.jpg

Year Of Release
2000

Director
Martin Campbell

Producer
Martin Campbell, Robert King, Marcia Nasatir, Lloyd Phillips

Writer
Robert King, Terry Hayes

Notes
The man behind James Bond critic-divider GoldenEye, Martin Campbell, was hired to direct Vertical Limit. Campbell then went on to direct blockbuster Casino Royale and critical failure Green Lantern.
The film also contains masses of homages to real life people and climbers, including character names and some scenes with genuine, famous climbers as extras and stuntmen.

---

Peter Garrett and his sister Annie are experienced climbers. They were taught everything they know by their father... but after a tragic accident, Peter and Annie become estranged.

Annie moves on and eventually becomes one of the greatest climbers in the world. Peter however, never forgets what he knwos but tends to stay away from the lifestyle.
Annie then becomes part of a team that heads up a K2 with a Billionaire called Eilliot Vaughn for a publicity stunt, and Peter being in the area, pays Annie a visit before she goes up...

... but the awkward meeting between them won't be the worst part of their meeting when a local climber and mountain man, Montgomery Wick, seems to know something nobody else does about Billionaire Vaughn... and when disaster hits Peter and Annie again in the form of an avalanche, Peter must rally the basecamp crew to rescue the buried survivors.

---

Another strange one for my thread. Vertical Limit has the makings to be a great film. Especially with it being almost a one off film about mountain climbing disasters.

Sadly though, it feels like a hollow wannabe Cliffhanger. Just without the style or peril.

It's missing genuine drama, genuine antagonists and is also missing a properly written story too.
The movie is simply that... a bunch of people up a mountain who need rescuing with the backstory of Peter and Annie becoming something thrown in to at least try to give the audience some sort of connection.

There are a couple of little sub-plots with some of the other characters, but sadly, it's nowhere near enough and definitely too late.

The overall dialogue writing is also substandard, especially when a whole group of climber have gathered and are all arguing whether or not they should go and rescue, or just let the survivors die.

The film does succeed in on area though. Similar to Dead Calm, it splits itself into two films. One with the rescue team, the other with Annie and Vaughn.
Vaughn is a kind of antagonist, but sadly, with there being very little connection to what's actually going on and to whom, it doesn't really lift anything.


The acting is also touch and go.
Chris O'Donnell as Peter is as usual, wooden to the extreme. It's hard to see with the $75m budget, why the filmmakers decided to choose him. His dialogue delivery is also extremely predictable, as if he already knows what's going to happen.

Robin Tunney plays Annie... she's a much better pick. Her overal character has little to do except survive disaster with Bill Paxton... and survive Bill Paxton.
Paxton however shines as Billionaire Vaughn. Though his character isn't given much range writing wise, Paxton really makes the role. His changing characteristic as the film goes on is well played by Bill but sadly, like I said, you don't really care about anyone around him for him to make much of an impact.

Back up comes from Isabella Scorupco, Alexander Siddig and Temuera Morrison.
I've said before about Morrison, any film with him on the cast sheet is destined to be half hearted.
Scott Glenn also makes an apparent spooky and mysterious character in Montgomery Wick... a sort of faux-wise old wizard of a character.

Ben Mendelsohn and Steve Le Marquand make tha great comic relief though as two Australian brothers who help out with the rescue. They're funny, engaging and full of charisma. Definitely the best on show.


The main thing that stands out though, is the choreography of the action sequences and effects department.
This is where the film really makes its mark.

Some of the action sequences are absolutely breathtaking and the effects that back them up are incredibly realistic. There's also some beautiful photography throughout in second and third acts too.

Sadly, that really the only good thing about the film... exciting action, top effects and photography.


---


All in all, worthy of a place in the great action and effects history books... beautiful to watch... just incredibly boring to sit through and shamefully cliche.
Shame really, it could have been great.

My rating: 28%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRejectedStampNew_zpsad11e9b5.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRejectedStampNew_zpsad11e9b5.png.html)

[JayDee]

Wow I've not seen Vertical Limit in absolute years! Must be 10 at least and remember very little of it. The one thing I do seem to remember is a bag of blood exploding to indicate the location of some characters. Or is that another film?

[The Rodent]

Yeah that's the one... they use the blood of a dead body and a flare to make a mark in the white snow.

[The Rodent]

Short review...

Review #195, Movie #265
Street Fighter

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/97/StreetFighterMoviePoster.jpg

Year Of Release
1994

Director
Stephen E de Souza

Producer
Edward R Pressman, Kenzo Tsujimoto, Akio Sakai

Writer
Stephen E de Souza

Notes
Like Sandra Bullock's Speed 2 having the connections to the Die Hard Franchise I mentioned a few pages back, Street Fighter has connections to the same action films plus others.
The man who wrote and directed Street Fighter, Stephen E de Souza, is the same man who wrote Schwarzenegger's films The Running Man and...

... Commando and what was going to be the sequel to Commando... Die Hard.
Although, Souza was also responsible for other cheese fests in the forms of Stallone's Judge Dredd, Beverly Hills Cop 3 and Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle Of Life.

Also, Van Damme was originally going to star as Johnny Cage in Mortal Kombat, but turned it down to star as Guile in Street Fighter.

---

Colonel Guile is the head of the AN Forces... his mission is to take down a warlord called General M.Bison.
Bison has taken a number of hostages, including a friend of Guile's called Blanka and is holding them to ransom.
Guile and his team, Cammy and and T.Hawk, must use whatever resources they have to stop Bison from receiving his ransom and making himself the Dictator of a country called Shadaloo.

Along the way, Guile makes allies and enemies... including Chun-Li, E.Honda, Balrog, Sagat, Vega, Dhalsim, Zangief... and Ryu and Ken.

---

Right... ok....


Badly written, taking nothing from the beloved video games apart from a few character names and throwing the whole lot into an extremely poorly written screenplay and script.

It's highly childlike in tone, highly childlike in dialogue and even worse when it comes to actual story.
Bad guy, takes hostages, demands money, the good guys go on a rampage to stop him. That's it.


What's really, really strange about the film though, is that along with all the bad points... it's actually incredibly entertaining.
Cheesy one-liners that don't work, unintentionally funny acting and scripting that's so unintentionally funny it makes it seem like it was on purpose... which again, makes it more entertaining.

Even with the rewritten characters, including Blanka who is now a genetic experiment rather than a swamp monster... it all kinda works well in a bad-good way.


Jean Claude Van Damme plays Guile. Wooden, acting badly even for JCVD, carries the action well but isn't likeable at all in this one.

Back up comes from Byron Mann, Damian Chapa, Ming Na, Peter Tuiasosopo, Wes Studi, Grand L Bush and Andrew Bryniarski... Bryniarski in particular is actually the best of the backup as Zangief. He seems to know it's a pile and embraces it.

Kylie Minogue as Cammy is by far the worst. It's hard to believe this woman was still getting acting gigs... she's awful. Not funny awful either.


The only good thing about Street Fighter is Raúl Juliá as M.Bison.
As usual with Juliá, even with a poor script and poor dialogue, he lifts the character to new levels.
He also seems to embrace the cheesy side of everything too and makes the most of it.
Vaya Con Dios.


The action and effects are what the film really tries to hammer home...

Sadly though, the only scrap worth a watch is Ryu and Ken versus Vega and Sagat. Even then there's not much to it.
The rest is poorly choreographed, poorly executed, poorly photographed and seems to have been filmed with the actual badly trained actors, rather than at least getting some proper stuntmen involved.
It's extremely underwhelming.

Still though, with the rest of the film being what it is, it makes for a change of scenery against the backdrop of cheese and wooden-ness.


---


All in all... so bad it's almost good. Unlike de Souza's other film Commando... it's not quite "good" enough for that badge of honour.

Entertaining if you're actually expecting a piece of cr*p as you can laugh at how bad it is, but if you go in with the mind-set that expects an exciting fighter-actioner, you'll be in for a big let down.
Not the worst film I've seen, even though it is awful.

I'll 50/50 this one rather than give it a Rodent's Rejected. It's worth a go, just to laugh at how bad it is if you like that sort of thing.

My rating: 3%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleR5050StampNew_zps36b9d868.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleR5050StampNew_zps36b9d868.png.html)

[Sexy Celebrity]

Tomorrow, it'll probably be your favorite movie of all time.

[nebbit]

Not a big fan of this movie :nope:

[mastermetal777]

Ah, Street Fighter. I knew it was bad as soon as I saw the poster. Video game films never seem to work. Even some of the better ones are still trash, which is what's truly sad.

[The Rodent]

Another one that's being repeated on telly over the past few days, and right now for that matter...


Review #196, Movie #266
Eraser


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2c/Eraser_%28movie_poster%29.jpg


Year Of Release
1996


Director
Chuck Russell


Producer
Anne Kopelson, Arnold Kopelson


Writer
Tony Puryear, Walon Green, Michael S Chernuchin


Notes
The film was hit by a few problems and almost backstabbing too.
Alongside writers Tony Puryear, Walon Green and Michael S Chernuchin, John Milius, William Wisher Jr and none other than Frank Darabont wrote treatments for the film. Milius, Wisher and Darabont aren't credited though.
Also, Director Chuck Russell and Producer Arnold Kopelson came to hate each other during the production.
Their hatred was so strong that Schwarzenegger actually rewrote the filming schedule and became a middle-man for the pair so they could communicate.

The film also contains a number of homages to Arnie and his other films, including one of the characters calling Arnie a "Tree Trunk". In reality, Arnie is known as "The Oak". Arnie also wears a uniform on one scene that has a catchphrase from one of his previous films printed on the back of it.

---

U.S Marshall John Kruger works for the Witness Security program. He's known as "Eraser" as he is able to erase people from existence for their own protection.
When an arms manufacturing company comes into disrepute and it appears they are selling top secret weapons to the Russians, Kruger is assigned to erase the identity of a woman who can prove the company's guilt of High Treason.

But when it appears that this corruption of illegal selling of top secret weapons has spread to some top ranking places within the Government, Kruger discovers that it's a lot harder to make people disappear than he originally thought.

---

Typical Schwarzenegger actioner but with a bit of a brain behind it.

What's different about Eraser, is that is has a couple of well hidden and surprising twists throughout and the acting is also really quite good for a typical Arnie Smash 'em Up.

The main thing is the screenplay. It's a done-to-death sequence of events, but the hidden twists give an extra air of entertainment and it makes the whole thing feel much fresher than the average actioner.

One thing I like about the film is the gory side of some of the action. It doesn't do the usual Hollywood thing of hiding snot and blood. It's not ultraviolent, but the violence and blood isn't exactly the usual.

The other thing is some original writing on behalf of the villains of the film. They're not just bad for the sake of it. They have a nicely simple a well written background to them and pitting them against Arnie's clean-cut but serious and tough good guy works well.


The acting, as I said is pretty good for an actioner.
Schwarzenegger is a slightly different character than usual. He's tough and solid yes, but he has a human and vulnerable side too. He carries the humour well too.
Vanessa L Williams as Lee Cullen makes a good show too. She's the woman under big Arn's protection. She's good within the action and has a nice personality that lifts the story too.

James Caan is awesome though as US Marshal Robert DeGuerin, Arnie's Boss. Definitely a standout role.

Robert Pastorelli stands out too as a kind of sidekick to Kruger. He's more of a comic relief but has a key role for the story.

Back up comes from Nick Chinlund, Joe Viterelli, Tony Longo, Mark Rolston, James Cromwell and James Coburn.


The action and effects though are a bit touch and go.
Some of the computer effects are a little dated by today's standard, especially some of the animated crocodiles and some of the weapons seen, but the choreography and action itself are absolutely brilliant and exciting.

With the dodgy computer effects, there's also some brilliantly rendered weaponry effects in the form of the Rail-Guns that the bad guys end up with.
Seeing such an original weapon fired repeatedly by good guys and bad guys in a big brawl is really fun.


---


All in all, pretty standard action up from big Arn and nothing that will make the ranks of Classic Schwarzenegger...

... but with the little twists and decent acting throughout, and that weapon mixed into the action, Eraser delivers exactly what the audience should expect.
Thrills, spills, action and cheesy Schwarzenegger one-liners.

My rating: 82%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[nebbit]

Nice review Mouse :yup:

[JayDee]

Definitely need to watch Eraser sometime. It's one of the very few Arnie films I've still never seen.

And nice to see you back reviewing. Wasn't sure if you had packed it in, or were perhaps preparing another big epic review like your X-Men franchise one. Personally I was hoping for the former! :p

[The Rodent]

Cheers guys :)

I won't pack it in yet, JayDee... I'm nearing Review #200 Movie #270...

[mastermetal777]

I want to see you review some of David Lynch's work, if you haven't already. Everyone seems to have a mixed opinion about his work. I really enjoy his stuff, but I wanna hear what you gotta say.

[The Rodent]

Review #197, Movie #267
Man On Fire

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e8/Man_on_fireposter.jpg

Year Of Release
2004

Director
Tony Scott

Producer
Lucas Foster, Arnon Milchan, Tony Scott

Writer
Brian Helgeland, AJ Quinnell

Notes
In 1983, Tony Scott pressed to make the film himself, which means Man On Fire would have been one of his earliest... but he was rejected as he was deemed too inexperienced.
The film was then made in 1987 with Arnon Milchan as producer and Elie Chouraqui as director... Milchan then approached Tony years later, which culminated in this 2004 effort.

---

John Creasy is a former US Marine, now working as a Bodyguard for the rich and famous. In Mexico City, kidnappings have become a pandemic and rich businessman Samuel Ramos hires Creasy to protect his 9 year old daughter, Pita.
Basically Creasy just has to babysit, drive Pita to school and just be around at all times to make sure she's safe.

Creasy finds it a little difficult at first when the highly intelligent Pita questions him and his reserve but eventually they find a common ground and a kinship.

But when Creasy and Pita are overwhelmed by armed men, and despite a heroic attempt by Creasy top stop these men, Pita is kidnapped and Creasy is left hospitalised and is under investigation into the kidnapping.

But more horror is around the corner and Creasy's hand is forced... and he makes the judgement that everyone involved with Pita's disappearance will pay for what they have done.


Bit of a tough one to review.
Man On Fire pushes a lot of buttons in the right way... but look under the skin only slightly and it feels extremely pretentious.

It lays on thick the message of friendship and revenge for wrongs... and at times it gets a little tiring.
It feels as though the filmmakers are pushing just too much with the "that was my friend and you will pay" mentality. We get the point, we didn't need reminded every 30 seconds.

The other thing is some of the implausible things that the main character does, there's very little exposition into how he gets around to doing and knowing certain things. Some of the things he discovers are shown, others aren't.


What works though, is the shooting style and photography and the character writing.
The character writing in particular is extremely good. Creasy's change along the running time and Pita's relationship with him is very well developed as the film goes on.
The other thing is how Creasy's scenes of information finding is handled. Basically he uses torture to get information so he can get to whoever was involved in Pita's kidnapping.
It's all very cold and calculated and doesn't ever go all Hollywood OTT.

The first act of the film based around Creasy and Pita though is laced very gently with humour too. Their relationship is worked on and given a real depth at times.


Which brings me to the acting.
We're treated to bit parts in the forms of Marc Anthony and Radha Mitchell as Pita's parents. Both are kept to the background to allow the story to develop around Creasy but when on screen, both make an impact. Anthony in particular is good.

Rachel Ticotin and Giancarlo Giannini also make a show as another double act. They're reporters/informants for Creasy. Ticotin in particular makes the best show of these two and looks hot too I might add.

Dakota Fanning as Pita isn't seen a great deal after the initial kidnapping, but she makes an impression that lasts throughout the film. Her chemistry with Washington is also top drawer.

Now Denzel Washington... cool, calm and calculated and all that comes second only to the rage you can see is building within the character that he's somehow able to bury deep down to get the job done.
Washington absolutely rocks this role.
His onscreen chemistry with everyone he comes into contact with, especially Fanning, is brilliantly pieced together too.

Back up comes from Christopher Walken.


There's little "action" as such, just hints and hits of more exciting cinema and the occasional gunfight and some torture scenes. They work well though and the choreography, backed up by the character connections makes the film more exciting and you can't help get behind Creasy and his gruesome techniques.


---


All in all, it won't make ranks of Classic any time soon, but it's still a satisfying revenge thriller with some nice hits of action every now and then.
Brilliantly acted though from everyone involved, especially Washington and the story and screenplay work too.
Just a shame about the borderline mawkish "message of friendship" that is plastered extremely thick all over the character writing.

My rating: 84%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[mastermetal777]

Good review, man. Never seen Man on Fire, but it's on my backlog of films to see. Gotta love a good Denzel Washington flick.

Also, "Back up comes from Christopher Walken." Is there really nothing else to say about him? lol granted it is Walken, but is he good, bad, hokey? Either way, he's always entertaining.

[The Rodent]

Cheers MM, it's worth a watch.

He's seen for about 60 seconds altogether but out of all the other extras, he stands out. He's a good guy too.

[JayDee]

Wow you're back after more than a month away! I didn't know that rodents hibernated! :p Is that really the first film you've watched in all that time, or have you been watching films but just not bothering to review them?

Though you've failed on your return as you've reviewed a film I haven't seen, thus making your review worthless! :D I'll need to get to it though as it's recently dawned on me that I'm actually a big fan of a lot of Tony Scott flicks - Beverly Hills Cop 2, Last Boy Scout, True Romance, Enemy of the State etc.

[The Rodent]

JayDee is jealous that I've done a film he hasn't :D

I've been watching films, just haven't reviewed them... I have a couple in mind for the lead up to my next benchmark.

If I time it right, I might be able to get Man Of Steel as the 200th review, 270th film... just depends if it's being shown in 2D at my local though.

[The Rodent]

Review #198, Movie #268
Jeepers Creepers

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6d/Jeepers_Creepers_film.jpg

Year Of Release
2001

Director
Victor Salva

Producer
Francis Ford Coppola, Tom Luse, Barry Opper

Writer
Victor Salva

Notes
The original title of the film was Here Comes The Boogeyman and was going to have Lance Henriksen as the Creeper.
Also, main duo Long and Philips weren't ever allowed to meet Jonathan Breck outside of the set, which gave their reactions to him more weight.

---

Siblings Trish and Darry Jenner are heading home to see their Mother... they're driving across the USA, basically on a road trip. Along the way they bicker, argue, wind each other up but seem to get on well as siblings.

When a large rusty brown truck near runs them off the road, they recall stories between them of a couple who died 20 years ago on the same road they are currently driving on...

... but their urban legends of psychopaths stalking travellers are the least of their worries when a few miles up the road they drive casually past an old Church...

... and they witness the driver of the rusty truck dumping what appears to be a dead body into the Church cellar...

---

Jeepers Creepers gives old style scares with modern twists and incorporates some nicely original touches to the proceedings too.

It starts out as a mystery thriller, in the same vein as maybe Joy Ride or even Spielberg's 1971 film Duel...

Jeepers then ramps up the story to newer heights and puts the audience on the back foot during the second act before ramping itself up again for the third act.
It's a very cleverly told tale with some brilliantly placed humour, some of it physical humour in regard to the strange driver of the rusty truck.

What makes the whole thing tie together better than most other horrors of modern day, is the genuinely spooky and untold story that manages to unravel itself during the running time.
There's a genuinely real feeling history to the screenplay and it also doesn't open up so much that it becomes yet another self-explanatory backstory like most horrors of recent times.

It's also wonderfully open when it comes to spooky visuals and disturbing ideas that lead up to a well conceived ending.


The acting is also top notch.
Justin Long and Gina Philips as Trish and Darry are wonderfully cast. I haven't seen Philips a great deal in other films but she holds it together really well in the strange circumstances.
Long though is by far at his most likable and really gets into the action and hysterics. I loved Justin in this film.
Their chemistry is also fantastic... their genuinely believable as Brother and Sister.

Backup comes from Patricia Belcher (playing it fantastically real as a psychic) and Jonathan Breck as the "Creeper".
Breck in particular is wonderfully dark and disturbing in what is basically a mime act.


The action is also great. Used sparingly and using shadows and silhouettes to great effect... and the more gory and louder action is also handled brilliantly too with some genuine jumps and 'whoa' moments mixed in with some standard, but knowingly standard, frights.
Some of the visuals in the first act, especially when introduced to the stranger truck driver are brilliantly photographed.


---


All in all... not an instant classic at time of release and garnering only 45% on some websites...
... and I'm skipping reviewing the lower than average sequel (which went too much for shocks and action rather than story and horror)...

... Jeepers Creepers gives all the spooky horror shocks and disturbing backstory and visuals mixed with nicely fine-tuned action and humour that will please any film fan.
Highly underrated fun and horror.

My rating: 87%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[The Rodent]

Ok boys and girls... I've just been to see it...

Review #199, Movie #269
Man Of Steel

This is for the 2D version

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/85/ManofSteelFinalPoster.jpg

Year Of Release
2013

Director
Zack Snyder

Producer
Christopher Nolan, Charles Roven, Emma Thomas, Deborah Snyder

Writer
David S Goyer, Christopher Nolan

---

The planet Krypton is dying... and at the brink of their destruction, General Zod makes war against those who are responsible for the predicament that is faced by the entire populous of the planet.

Jor-El, a scientist on the planet has warned the heads of Krypton of this fate, but he was ignored and has become a target of Zod as he has launched his infant son Kal-El to safety where he can hide in peace on Earth.

After Krypton's destruction, Zod makes it his mission to hunt Kal-El across the stars and retrieve a very particular piece of technology that was sent to Earth with Kal-El and destroy Earth to build an new Krypton... but after 33 years of living with Humans, Kal-El, now known as Clark Kent, will have to make a choice...

... to join Zod and allow his people to live again... or stand against the General and his hoard and become a saviour for mankind.


---


Ok... slammed by many, revered by others... scale wise, the second half of Man Of Steel is exactly what most Superhero Movies should be.

Many have hammered the lack of cheese and fun of the other Superman films of years gone by... I say, forget those films for now... Man Of Steel isn't meant to be those films... and many forget that Superman The Movie had almost a musical number stuck in the middle...

... I'd like to see the faces of those slamming Man Of Steel if they'd included a scene like that in this film :D
There are also a few action scenes that seem to have come from the original Christopher Reeve films Superman The Movie and Superman II... in particular Clark getting bullied by a Trucker and a burly brawl in Smallville between bad guys and the Military.

The other thing... is that Man Of Steel... spoiler alert guys... fits in perfectly with The Dark Knight Trilogy... and a connection is implied within the third act as well :up:


Now...
The epic scale battles and fist fights, explosions, gunfights and other bodyslamming action scenes that make up most of the second half of the film is something that has been missing from a Superman film since, well, ever really.

The overall Global size of the action, I don't think, has ever been seen on screen before in many films apart from maybe 2012 or Independence Day... it's huge.
The kind of scale to expect is something that is normally only seen on the pages of the comics themselves.

Much of the action takes place throughout Metropolis and Smallville... but there are other set pieces included in the destruction when Zod get his plan together that give just that extra touch of epicness that make Man Of Steel stand apart from other Superhero films.


The overall effects department hasn't been spared either. By far the most effective, erm, effects I have yet to see in an action film... Steel almost appears to have rewritten some of the computer-whizz rulebooks, it's that well put together in the CGI and Practical Effects stakes.
It's by far the most destructive film I've seen in a long, long time.


The choreography is also top drawer and backs up the action fantastically and excitingly... with the exception of two things...
1) Snyder's overuse of close-ups during burly brawls between The Supe and whichever evil Kryptonian he is currently trading punches with. It knocks the viewer sideways at times and gets disorientating.
2) Snyder's overuse of fast zooming with a handheld camera whenever something in the distance does anything. Similar to JJ Abrams' fast zooming whenever the Starship Enterprise goes into warp...


Other than those two faults, which don't really take much away from the good points... Steel does have one major problem... most of the first half of the film.

The writing is substandard character wise... the first half is mainly one -long excuse note made up of flashbacks that tell Kal-El's story, Krypton's history, and Clark's early life on Earth with his overprotective father Jonathan.
There's also little audience to character connections... you don't really get to care enough about the leads... especially, sadly, the story between Clark and Lois Lane...

Now, all the actors involved do an absolute top job. They're all giving 101%... but the poor scripting and lack of character building and connection making screenplay within the first half, it makes the whole film feel hollow to an extent. There are some characters that everyone knows and loves that have been rewritten as well and it feels highly gimmicky. Again though, the actors involved are at the top of their game, it's the scripting that lets it down.

It's almost as if character-character and audience-character connection is simply a given and the writers... Goyer and Nolan... haven't really tried to write those connections because they thought that past connections and maybe a touch of nostalgia and knowledge on the audience's behalf would have been enough.
I can see how that approach would work, but it makes some of the character emotions a little non-universal.

However:
Cavill is perfect as Clark/Kal/Superman... I had difficulty at the very beginning seeing him as Superman, but as the movie progressed, I fell in love with this new performance... especially as Cavill appears to be learning the role, as the character learns his new powers. That is one thing that does work well with the writing. Cavill's physique is also bang on the money.

Amy Adams is also on top form... she has less to do than Cavill though, and sadly, like I said, the poor character writing makes the connection between her and Cavill sketchy at best.
Her role within Superman/Clark's life has also been rewritten along with some of the other rewritten characters.

Back up comes from Antje Traue as Zod's right-hand girl Faora... and from Kevin Costner and Diane Lane as Jonathan and Martha Kent... neither are seen enough tbh, I loved them in these roles, especially Costner... they're extremely likeable and are near to being the best written of the lot.
More backup comes from Lawrence Fishburne as a rewritten Perry White and Russell Crowe as Jor-El.
Crowe is mainly seen as a hologram though and his role is very generic throughout. Crowe does a pretty decent job though.

The standout role though is Michael Shannon as General Zod. Shannon absolutely makes this film. He's threatening when needed, holds his weight against Cavill's muscled Super Man... I loved Shannon's take as Zod, he beats Terrence Stamp by miles... that's something I never thought I'd say.


---


All in all... the tremendous acting makes up for the badly written script and screenplay in the first half...

... the explosive second half more than makes up for any problems in the first half as well... if they had just taken more time with the writing in that first hour, this could easily, quite easily, be a film pushing the 100% barrier... sadly I have to mark it down due to lack of actual character.
But still...
... top effects, probably the best I've ever seen... top action, great acting and visual/action epicness usually only seen on comicbook pages.

My rating: 91%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[Sexy Celebrity]

Ok boys and girls...

I'm not included?

[JoeHorrorFanatic]

I agree that the complaints people have made about this movie not being as "fun" as the Reeves films are unfounded. Like you said, this isn't that type of movie. And yes, the action scenes were epic.
I also agree about the Lois Lane/Clark Kent relationship not being developed enough, but hopefully they'll do a better job of that in the sequel. Someone brought up a good point, though; he said that if the movie focused more on the romance, it would have been too much like Thor. Don't get me wrong, I really like Thor and I own it on Blu-Ray, but the one complaint for me was that I felt like I was watching a romantic comedy at some parts.
Great review :up:

[The Rodent]

Cheers bud... I found that maybe the writers just thought we all know the connections the characters have and just decided not to write them in.

As I said, it doesn't make the film Universal for people who aren't up on Superman Lore.

Other than that, the film rocks as far as I'm concerned. Not a film that would make a Top 100 list any time soon, but it still rocks nonetheless.

[JayDee]

I thought you were going to try and save Man of Steel for review #200.

Anyway nice review Rodent. :up: So how would you rank it amongst the Superman films and superhero films in general?

[The Rodent]

Cheers mate... I thought about putting it in 200th... tbh I'm making my next review my last official one of the thread. I'm making it to 200 Reviews and then taking a break from it for a while... so I'm lining up a special film for the last spot.

I'll be returning to the thread in August for The World's End though, which will more than likely be Review 301.

I rated the Superman films like this:
Superman: The Movie 97%
Superman II 99%
Superman III 70%
Superman IV: The Quest For Peace 0%
Superman Returns 50%
Man Of Steel 91%

My original Superman Reviews are in Review #26 on page 3 ;)


In terms of personal preference though...

6: Superman IV: The Quest For Peace
5: Superman III
4: Superman Returns
3: Superman: The Movie
2: Man Of Steel
1: Superman II

[The Rodent]

Ok... quick update before I drop out of writing reviews for a while.

Am at a loss as to what to make my last review... I might wait until August when The World's End comes out and complete the Three Flavours Cornetto Trilogy Review... I reviewed Shaun Of The Dead and Hot Fuzz in Review 181 so... who knows.

PAGE 1

1 - Young Guns 90%
2 - A Nightmare On Elm Street (2010 Remake) 2%
3 – 2012 15%
4 - Cowboys And Aliens 15%
5 – Cloverfield 80%
6 – Leon 75%
7 – Dreamcatcher 30%
8 - Alien 3 Definitive Version Vs Theatrical Release 90%
9 - The 'Burbs 85%
10 - Starship Troopers 90% [11]


PAGE 2

11 – Predator 99%
12 – Robocop 100%
13 - John Carpenter's The Thing 95%
14 - Alien Vs Predator and Aliens Vs Predator Requiem 25% & 70%
15 - Terminator Foursome (1-4) 90%, 95%, 10% & 75%
16 - The Fourth Kind 35%
17 - Jurassic Park 80%
18 - Pirates Of The Caribbean Original Trilogy (1-3) 95%, 97% & 96%
19 - The Dark Crystal 65%
20 – Tremors 90% [27]


PAGE 3

21 – Paul 30%
22 - Full Metal Jacket 85%
23 - Demolition Man 70%
24 - Dumb And Dumber 95%
25 - Ridley Scott's Robin Hood 15%
26 - Christopher Reeve Superman Foursome (1-4) And Superman Returns 97%, 99%, 70%, 0% & 50%
27 - Batman Begins 90%
28 - The Dark Knight 95%
29 – Ghostbusters 98%
30 - Star Wars Franchise (1-6) 100%, 100%, 98%, 20%, 5% & 55% [46]


PAGE 4

31 – Critters 89%
32 - The Matrix Trilogy (1-3) 90%, 75% & 75%
33 – Arachnophobia 65%
34 - Super 8 45%
35 - The Shawshank Redemption 100%
36 - The Abyss 98%
37 - Troll Hunter 10%
38 - John Carpenter's The Fog 95%
39 - Dog Soldiers 95%
40 - The Shining 99% [58]


PAGE 5

41 - Indiana Jones Foursome (1-4) 100%, 99%, 100% & 1%
42 - Robert Rodriguez' Predators 85%
43 - Sam Raimi's Spider Man Trilogy (1-3) 85%, 95% & 45% [66]
44 - Rocky Franchise (1-6) 95%, 93%, 75%, 80%, 50% & 94%
45 - The Lost Boys 95%
46 – Evolution 90%
47 - Alien Foursome (1-4 Includes A Rerun Of Review #8) 100%, 100%, 90% & 40%
48 - Jurassic Park Trilogy (1-3 Includes A Rerun Of Review #17) 80%, 65% & 10%
49 - Gremlins Duo (1 & 2) 85% & 65%
50 - Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (Original Movie) 90%
51 - 30 Days Of Night 80% [83]

PAGE 6

52 - From Dusk Till Dawn 96%
53 - I, Robot 60%
54 - Steven Spielberg's War Of The Worlds 50%
55 – Blade Runner 100%
56 – Armageddon 70%
57 – Signs 80% [89]

PAGE 7

58 - The Quick And The Dead 90%
59 – Ransom 100%
60 - The Big Lebowski 100%
61 - Ghostbusters Duo (1 & 2 Includes A Rerun Of Review #29) 98% & 70% [93]

PAGE 8

62 - Pitch Black 85%
63 - The Day After Tomorrow 65%
64 - Independence Day 88%
65 - Cat's Eye 89%
66 – Equilibrium 80%
67 - Rise Of The Planet Of The Apes 100%
68 - The Karate Kid (Original Movie) 95% [68th Review 100th Movie]
69 - Die Hard Franchise (1-4) 95%, 40%, 85% & 87%
70 – Poltergeist 90%


PAGE 9

71 - The Passion Of The Christ 100%
72 - Paranormal Activity 5%
73 - Paranormal Activity 2 15%
74 - Pulp Fiction 98%
75 - Critters Foursome (1-4 Includes A Rerun Of Review #31) 89%, 15%, 55% & 30%
76 – Unforgiven 100%
77 - Black Hawk Down 95%
78 - The Fly (1986 Remake) 94%
79 - Lake Placid 65% [116]

PAGE 10

80 - Back To The Future Trilogy (1-3) 98%, 85% & 80%
81 - Lethal Weapon Foursome (1-4) 97%, 98%, 90% & 93%
82 - Star Trek Franchise (1-11) 85%, 95%, 87%, 83%, 86%, 89%, 78%, 32%, 80%, 84% & 98%
83 - Of Mice And Men 96%
84 - An American Werewolf In London 94% [136]

PAGE 11

85 - Predator 2 (Includes A Rerun of Reviews #11 & #42) 99%, 99%, 85%
86 – Jaws 100%
87 - American Pie Original Trilogy (1-3) 95%, 85% & 85%
88 – Godzilla 86%
89 - The Negotiator 92%
90 - The Green Mile 101% [144]


PAGE 12

91 - The Mist 98%
92 - Silent Hill 58%
93 – Highlander 86%
94 - The Goonies 97%
95 – Batman 93%
96 - Batman Returns 94% [150]

PAGE 13

97 - I Am Legend 83%
98 – Titanic 97%
99 - Saving Private Ryan 101%
100 – Avatar 96% [100th Review, 154th Movie]


PAGE 14

101 - The Simpsons Movie 70%
102 - District 9 84%
103 – Slither 88%
104 – Wanted 68% [158]

PAGE 15

105 – Casino 100%
106 - No Country For Old Men 94%
107 - Blown Away 50%
108 - The Cowboys 87%
109 - K-PAX 83%
110 - The Lord Of The Rings Trilogy (1-3) 95%, 96% & 97%
111 - Edward Scissorhands 93% [167]

PAGE 16

112 - The Expendables 90%
113 - Little Shop 100%
114 - 3:10 To Yuma 74% [170]

PAGE 17

115 – Trainspotting 98%
116 - A Bug's Life (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon) 91%
117 - Cars (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon) 38%
118 - Monsters Inc. (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon) 100%
119 - WALL-E (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon) 101% [175]

PAGE 18

120 - The Incredibles (Part Of Rodent's 5 Review Pixar Marathon) 97%
121 – Gladiator 98%
122 - The Dark Knight Rises (Includes A Rerun Of Reviews #27 & #28) 90%, 95% & 98%
123 - King Kong 87%
124 - Mortal Kombat 65% [180]

PAGE 19

125 – Appaloosa 38%
126 – Legend 91%
127 - Dead Calm 92%
128 - The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button 83%
129 - Top Gun 71%
130 - Mission: Impossible Foursome (1-4) [130th Review, 189 Movies In Total] 89%, 91%, 96% & 96%
131 – Twins 87%

PAGE 20

132 - Pearl Harbor 12%
133 - Tremors Trilogy (1-3 Includes A Rerun Of Review #20) 90%, 23% & 11%
134 – Paulie 86%
135 - Hard Target 78%
136 - Universal Soldier 88%
137 - Sudden Death 83% [197]

PAGE 21

138 – Timecop 92%
139 - The Crow 88%
140 - American History X 100% [140th Review, 200th Movie]
141 - Gone Baby Gone 83%

PAGE 22

142 – Waterworld 91%
143 - The Fifth Element 93%
144 - Cop Land 94%
145 - Mississippi Burning 100%
146 - Beverly Hills Cop Trilogy (1-3) (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon) [208] 97%, 82% & 27%

PAGE 23

147 - Field Of Dreams (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon) 90%
148 - Stand By Me (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon) 97%
149 - Rain Man (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon) 100%
150 - Big Trouble In Little China (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon) 86%
151 - Who Framed Roger Rabbit? (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon) 100%
152 - Innerspace (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon) 90% [214]

PAGE 24

153 - Short Circuit Duo (1 & 2) (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon) 89% & 63%
154 - Commando (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon) 68%
155 - Explorers (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon) 88% [218]

PAGE 25

156 - The Untouchables (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon) 92%
157 - Flight Of The Navigator (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon) 96%
158 - Platoon (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon) 98%
159 - Uncle Buck (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon) 90%
160 - Weird Science (Part Of Rodent's 15 Review 1980s Marathon) 79%
161 - The 40 Year Old Virgin 81% [224]

PAGE 26

162 - The A Team 82%
163 - Dante's Peak 91%
164 – Volcano 84%
165 – Hancock 54%
166 - True Grit Vs True Grit 96% & 96% [230]

PAGE 27

167 – Watchmen 94%
168 - John Carpenter's The Thing And The Thing (Includes A Rerun And Small Edit Of Review #13) 95% & 42%
169 – Scrooged (Part Of Rodent’s 5 Christmas Movie Marathon) 93%
170 – Bad Santa (Part Of Rodent’s 5 Christmas Movie Marathon) 83% [234]

PAGE 28

171 – Home Alone (Part Of Rodent’s 5 Christmas Movie Marathon) 87%
172 – Elf (Part Of Rodent’s 5 Christmas Movie Marathon) 91%
173 – The Grinch (Part Of Rodent’s 5 Christmas Movie Marathon) 78%
174 – Ghost 98% [238]

PAGE 29

175 – Prometheus 89%
176 – Willow 92% [240]

PAGE 30

177 – The Expendables 2 (Includes A Rerun Of Review #112) 90% & 92%
178 – Dredd 96%
179 – Repo Man 98%
180 – Alien Hunter 0%
181 – Two Of The Three Flavours Cornetto Trilogy 97% & 98% [246]

PAGE 31

182 – Reign Of Fire 23%
183 – Porky’s 87%
184 – Fly Away Home 95%
185 – Rear Window 99% [185th Review 250th Movie]

PAGE 32… The Start Of The New Look Reviews

186 – Robin Hood: Prince Of Thieves 94%
187 – Speed And Speed 2: Cruise Control 93% & 4%
188 – Deep Blue Sea 72%
189 – The War Of The Worlds 76%
190 – The Amazing Spider-Man 95%
191 – This Boy’s Life 94% [257]

PAGE 33

192 – Skyline 7%
193 – X-Men The Franchise So Far 84%, 87%, 89%, 81% (Wolverine) & 82% (First Class) [263]

PAGE 34

194 – Vertical Limit 28%
195 – Street Fighter 3%
196 – Eraser 82%
197 – Man On Fire 84%
198 – Jeepers Creepers 87%
199 – Man Of Steel 91%

200 – Rodent's Last Review [200th Review, 270th Movie]

[JayDee]

It's a shame that you're taking a break Rodent. Why are you taking a break anyway? Just a bit burnt out? Real life getting in the way? Or have you just accepted the fact that you shall never best me! :p That's how I stay on top; other people may write better reviews or write more frequently but I just keep churning them out. I outlast them all! :D

[The Rodent]

Just time to retire as King Of Reviews... I know that if I keep going you'll stay jealous forever.

:D


Just feel I've done what I can. I've covered pretty much both of my Top 100s that I made and have covered pretty much every other fave of mine as well... then a few more on top of that also.
After 270 films I'm also getting a bit burnt out.

I'll more than likely return from time to time whenever I see something that deserves a review, but for now, I'm cutting back.

[Sexy Celebrity]

I prefer you over JayDee.

[The Rodent]

Shhh... don't tell JayDee.

[JayDee]

I prefer you over JayDee.

:eek: How could you?!!! Are we talking reviews here or just as people? Personally I don't really care if I personally am not liked but I can't have a bad word said about my reviews! :p

[Masterman]

You should really pick this review thread back up. Some really good reviews here, alot of movies I've seen and enjoy.

[The Rodent]

Cheers matey... I'll be back in a few weeks for sure so I can review The World's End...

I thought of a bunch of films the other day that I haven't yet covered... so maybe after this break and I get TWE done, I may start it up again.

[Masterman]

Cheers matey... I'll be back in a few weeks for sure so I can review The World's End...

I thought of a bunch of films the other day that I haven't yet covered... so maybe after this break and I get TWE done, I may start it up again.

Good to hear.

[Gideon58]

I remember when I first saw THE BURBS, I had a pre-conceived notion of what a movie with that title and that cast would be like and the film turned out to be nothing like I expected, but I liked it just the same.

[JayDee]

So what's going on with #200 Rodent? Did you not catch World's End at the cinema?

You better be careful or I'll get to 200 before you! :D In fact I could do it right now. Currently I'm at 189 reviews, but have enough kicking around that I could hit and surpass 200 if I posted them all in one go

[The Rodent]

Yeah I missed it... I'm still making lists for what to write tbh... I've got a few franchises to go though yet, so will be looking for something decent for 200th.

[Sexy Celebrity]

Do a video.

[The Rodent]

Decided to make this one my 200th. Fan of the cast and fan of the movie and it's on TV right now too... slightly out of practice, but here goes.

Review #200, Movie #270
Judgment Night

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/aa/Judgment_night_poster.jpg

Year Of Release
1993

Director
Stephen Hopkins

Producer
Gene Levy, Christopher Mollo, Lloyd Segan, Marilyn Vance

Writer
Lewis Colick, Jere Cunningham

Cast
Emilio Estevez, Stephen Dorff, Cuba Gooding Jr, Jeremy Piven, Peter Greene and Denis Leary

Notes
Stephen Hopkins, the director behind Predator 2 and Alan Silvesrtry, the man behind the music for Predator worked together on this film, and the thing is, this film has small elements of both films.
Emilio Estevez was also something like 10th in line to play Frank Wyatt. Other stars included Tom Cruise and Christian Slater. All of whom dropped out and because of this, Estevez ended up getting a bigger pay-check than was originally negotiated.


---


Brothers Frank and John Wyatt and their friends Mike and Ray head out to see a Boxing match and spend a long awaited boys weekend drinking beer and driving around in an RV.
When a traffic jam looks like putting an end to their fun and games, they take a detour from the Highway and end up in a poor residential 'hood where Gang Law rules...

... and the foursome end up on a chase of their life from a particularly nasty Gangland Boss when they inadvertently witness a murder.


---


What sounds simple and pretty outlandish at times is actually a tightly woven story of paranoia, fear, blood, violence and sheer atmosphere that bases itself around almost a coming of age story but with 20-somethings in the lead roles.

For a start, the tension never lets up. From the get-go you just know something bad is on the cards. It's not some exposition dialogue though, it's the fine acting involved and general atmosphere that hits the viewer where it matters and get you on the edge of your seat.

Some of the story telling and settings are outlandish, for instance what goes on in some scenes that lead the cast into some sewers or across a rooftop... you'd think "Really?" but the lead up and following scenes combined with the casting and general acting makes it work brilliantly and the overall tense setting plays wonderfully with the viewer's nerves.


Which brings me to the acting.
Estevez as Frank Wyatt is brilliantly out of his depth but has a streetwise background that shines through the role. It's toward the ens we really see Frank's real side and Estevez doesn't disappoint.
Stephen Dorff as John Wyatt is also on top form. I'm not a huge fan of Dorff, but here he really lets go and becomes the younger, wannabe badass Brother you get to care about.
Gooding Jr is also, as usual with Jr, on top form. He's certainly one of the most likeable of the foursome.
Jeremy Piven, sadly, is the most likeable.

Denis Leary though makes the biggest mark as Fallon. Leary absolutely rocks this movie. Even when not on screen he lives with the viewer and never fails to impress, and even scare the viewer, when he is on screen.
Leary absolutely makes this film what it is: A tense and gripping action-drama.

The chemistry across all the actors along with the well written characters and their backgrounds is also top notch and gives the audience something to really care about too and adds so much more to what could have been just another chase movie.


The backing track did remind me of Predator though. Not a bad thing, just felt a bit like recycled music through lack of trying.


---


All in all, a chase movie with ex-college buddies in the leads and simply yet nicely written backstories crossed with not only great acting across the board but also some exceptionally tense and gripping scenes and atmosphere.
It's not very often I say this, but although the film has a few faults in terms of a couple scene settings, my heart was pounding throughout the whole running time, it's still that well put together.

My Rating: 93%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[Sexy Celebrity]

Emilio Estevez played a character that Christian Slater decided not to play? Oh, Lord. That is LOW.

[The Rodent]

I reckon if anyone else was in the role, especially Slater or Cruise... this film wouldn't have worked as well.

[Sexy Celebrity]

Well, yeah. Emilio Estevez could play Anna Nicole Smith and it would be fabulous. I don't mind him in anything.

[edarsenal]

as always, very cool review. I scarcely remember this one from when it came out and I do remember I did enjoying it and emilio in the lead

[The Rodent]

Thanks Man... :up:

[JayDee]

Congats on hitting the 200 mark Rodent! :up: And a good film to achieve it with. I love Judgment Night, a real old favourite of mine. It's got some great set-pieces and is just a lot of fun

[The Rodent]

Cheers JayDee!

I just loved the atmosphere of it all. Leary is definitely the guy who makes the film worth watching.

Where are you at now then?

[edarsenal]

was actually looking for your reviews of the two True Grits when I saw them on your Over 90% thread and was curious to read them when i saw you gave them both the exact same rating, and instead, stumbled across some favorites; namely: Waterworld, Fifth Element, Cop Land and Willow. All of which had over 90% and I was very happy to see so much love for them.

I agree with Waterworld, it was a lot of fun, especially with Dennis Hopper's character and I really don't understand WHY it did so bad when it came out.

I'm a huge fan of fifth element and luc besson's style, writing and directing ability. He always brings such life, depth and humor to his characters.

I've always felt that Cop Land allowed Sly to act instead of simply being an action character.

And Willow I have loved since it first came out in the 80's. Ron Howard is an exceptional story teller and Willow is one of the many movies that prove it.

Even though I didn't find what I searched for, I still found something very worthwhile.
As always, BRAVO rodent!!

[The Rodent]

The True Grit reviews are on page 26 if you still want to have a look :)

Cheers for reading though bud and thank you for the reps!

[mastermetal777]

Man, it's been a while since I've seen an update from this page lol. I miss your reviews, Rodent, even if I disagree with some of your more recent ones (Man of Steel wasn't that great).

[The Rodent]

I'm going to edit it now so it says 100% :p

[mastermetal777]

Lol I just thought the script was badly written and the pacing was terrible. It jumped around too much from one point in Supe's life to another without any real connection or tie-in to the moment before or after. The action scenes were epic and very well done (typical of Zach Snyder), but the acting was hit-or-miss, particularly a huge miss from Russell Crowe (he looked bored the whole time). Henry Cavill was great as Superman, as was Michael Shannon as Zod. Kevin Costner did a decent job as Jonathan Kent too. Everyone else...meh. I don't hate the movie, but I don't see it as amazing either. It took me 2 viewings to figure it out too lol.

[edarsenal]

The True Grit reviews are on page 26 if you still want to have a look :)

Cheers for reading though bud and thank you for the reps!

holy cheetos, i shot right over it when i was searching lol
THANKS rodent! I DID go back to check it out and i quite agree on just about everything you said. The original True Grit and the follow up, Rooster Cogburn were childhood favorites of mine and while i do, normally, cringe upon hearing a movie is gonna be a remake of an old favorite, i had actually looked forward and was very happy with the remake because it WAS the coen brothers and i was very curious to see jeff bridges' take on john wayne's character. He brought out everything that Wayne made great with the role and, like you mentioned, drew you in a little more closely as far as the humanity of the character. Even though john wayne was and is, pretty damn endearing as rooster cogburn.

Anothe bravo and more reps :) ;)

[The Rodent]

Ok, let's see if I can get back into the swing of things.

So, to start off the 200s...

Review #201, Movie #271
Close Encounters Of The Third Kind

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d9/Close_Encounters_poster.jpg

Year Of Release
Originally 1977 and reissued in 1980

Director
Steven Spielberg

Producer
Julia Phillips, Michael Phillips

Writer
Steven Spielberg

Cast
Richard Dreyfuss, Melinda Dillon, Cary Guffey, Bob Balaban, Teri Garr, Lance Henriksen and François Truffaut

Notes
Close Encounters has become a staple inspiration in the movie world since its creation, but was itself inspired by real life events in Spielberg's childhood when he saw a meteor shower in New Jersey with his Father.

Richard Dreyfuss also got the lead role through basically badgering Spielberg, even showing up at Spielberg's office and hounding him.
Spielberg wanted Steve McQueen, Dustin Hoffman, Al Pacino, Jack Nicholson and Gene Hackman to read for the part and hadn't even considered Dreyfuss.
Eventually Dreyfuss got the job through basically annoying Spielberg into submission, and then even had input on how the role should be portrayed... eventually becoming one of the most memorable and well acted characters in film history.

Spielberg has admitted that since having children, if he had been a Father at the time of making Close Encounters, he would have made the ending with Roy Neary work out differently.
Tbh though, I reckon the ending is more powerful the way it is.


---


When Flight 19, that went missing over the Bermuda Triangle in 1945, reappears 30 years later in the Sonoran Desert in brand new condition... top Government scientists are brought in to research what happened.

Shortly afterward, Roy Neary and his family, and single Mother Jillian and 3 year old son Barry, are thrown into a circle of conspiracy theorists and covert Government operations when strange lights appear over Wyoming. Roy, Jillian and Barry also start to experience visions and almost hallucinations, eventually leading to Roy going near to madness.

When it appears that Extra-terrestrial forces may be behind Flight 19 and the strange lights over Wyoming and other places around the world, and then shortly afterward 3 year old Barry vanishes, Roy and Jillian must do everything they can to find out the truth of these disturbing occurrences.


---


Where to start?
Tough question.

Ok... CO is underlined with typical Spielberg tones. Broken/breaking families, single Mothers and some normal family life too.
What's also mixed in though is some very normal and realistic day-to-day humour and situations like a father asking his kids if they want to play golf or go to the movies, arguments between parents about small things, tons of small-talk between family members and adding all these things into the small scale scenes near the start of the film makes for a much more believable set of circumstances and draws the viewer into the world that Spielberg has created.

What makes CO different though is that it starts out as an incredibly intricate mystery thriller that borders sometimes on the horror genre depending on the scene. The disparateness between the scenes adds an authentic realism to the strange occurrences.
It also manages to incorporate fantasy and sci-fi into the mix as well and quite often throws the viewer onto the backfoot.

It's all handled extremely well too. What could have turned into a mess of a screenplay is pieced together with such style and precision for detail, and leaving a few smaller details out as well that then get explained in other scenes through almost subliminal means, it gives the audience a voyage of discovery along with the characters.
It also gives an air of authenticity to the film's subject matter of aliens and subliminal messages. It's a very cleverly pieced together movie on all fronts yet doesn't bombard the viewer to the point they're uncomfortable.

Another thing though, is that the film is very 70s in style and visual substance... yet wonderfully, it hasn't actually aged at all.
Backing up the style though, are some of the most memorable set pieces, filing locations and just generally creative ideas in cinematic history, some of which were invented by music maestro John Williams.

I'm actually finding it hard to pick out faults with the film's technical side.


The acting though is also spot on.
Richard Dreyfuss leads the cast. He's also, as usual with Dreyfuss, incredibly engaging and loveable. Dreyfuss' natural on screen presence lifts and changes what could have been a generic lead character and makes for one of cinema's most memorable leading men. Along with Jaws and Mr Holland's Opus, this is Dreyfuss at his absolute best.

Backing up Dreyfuss is Melinda Dillon as Jillian. I'm not familiar with Dillon's other work, but in CO, she's definitely on par with her co-star. She holds well in the emotional scenes and makes for a great scream-Queen as well during the more scary scenes.

We're also treated to an appearance by François Truffaut as a French scientist. Out of the handful of secondary characters, Truffaut stands out as the most likeable.

Backup comes from Teri Garr as Roy Neary's suffering wife... and a magnificent performance from Cary Guffey who was essentially still a baby during filming.


The effects of the film are also top notch.
The film is pushing close to 40 years old yet the effects, their limited usage at the start and then going into a full blown SFX film toward the end, is such a marvel to watch and they never disappoint.
There are also some spooky lighting visuals throughout and some scenes that are so well put together they can actually spook the audience wonderfully.
With John Williams' score and other certain ideas with his 5-tone motif backing up the visuals, the film can almost do no wrong at all.


---


All in all, a classic in the truest sense of the word.
Close Encounters has everything from humour and even comedy, to horror and mystery and layers the whole lot over a science fiction and mystery backdrop and then backs itself up with some of the best characters, visuals, general inventiveness and sound design ever seen and heard.
Excellent filmmaking on all fronts and definitely Spielberg's best work to date.

My rating: 101% Perfect
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[The Rodent]

I'll have to look into it :D

Maybe for one of my usual specials... like 210th or something.

[seanc]

I really need to see Close Encounters. Every time someone talks about it I wonder why i have not already.

[The Rodent]

It's one of those must sees, Sean.

Highly recommend it.

[Sexy Celebrity]

I'll have to look into it :D

Maybe for one of my usual specials... like 210th or something.

Rodent isn't talking to himself here. I had a post above it telling him to make a video review, but I had to delete it (don't ask).

[Cobpyth]

I really need to see Close Encounters. Every time someone talks about it I wonder why i have not already.

Same here.

I have it on DVD, so I'll try to watch it this week.

[Sexy Celebrity]

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=11477&stc=1&d=1381269397

:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:

OH MY GOD, RODENT.

You must have heard the news by now.

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You're gonna have one BIZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZY Summer 2015!

(On top of watching Young Guns and Young Guns II -- you'll be watching YOUNG GUNS III !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

[mastermetal777]

I think I saw Close Encounters once before. I didn't finish it, but I thought the visuals were nothing short of stunning for the time, and they even hold up exceptionally well today.

[Sexy Celebrity]

Rodent, did you see the news?!

[The Rodent]

I think you made that yourself. I'm not much interested tbh. The first film is all I like.

[Sexy Celebrity]

I swear I did not!

[Sexy Celebrity]

Here's the blurb I found about it:

In a shocking announcement, Kiefer Sutherland admitted yesterday that he and his fellow co-stars from Young Guns and its 1990 sequel, Young Guns II, were all returning for Young Guns III, due out in the summer of 2015. Here you can already find a teaser poster, although not an official one. Sutherland reports that everybody from the films, including Emilio Estevez and his brother, Charlie Sheen, as well as Christian Slater from the sequel, were all returning, despite many of them being killed off. "It's a really ridiculous idea for part three, yet we're all fascinated," Sutherland said in an interview. "We're all on board. As of now, anyway. Wait till you see what happens. Fans of the first movie should like it, but we're also aiming towards a new audience. It's a totally new concept."

[The Rodent]

Sounds like they'll be going for a fantasy thing then and rely on the audience to suspend disbelief.

Bit odd though, they should be calling it Old Guns, these guys are all in their 50s.

[The Rodent]

Not sure how they'll bring back the characters either. They can't be doing a side story "before they died" sort of thing as they're all too old for the continuity.

They'd be better off remaking the original and using more fact than fiction for the story and make it a proper historical drama full of gunfights.

[Sexy Celebrity]

There was a comment on IMDB where someone said they knew the storyline and it involved everyone PLAYING THEMSELVES and that the movie was about them getting together and doing a reenactment of the first two movies (like how people like to do Civil War reenactments -- this would be the stars of Young Guns reenacting their first two movies, but as older people). It's about the actors. It's going to be set in Hollywood and be very Charlie Kaufman-ish.

[The Rodent]

Oh right, then kinda like a Documentary then.

I might be interested if that was the case.

Emilio has spoken about a third film in the past before though anyway.

[Sexy Celebrity]

Even I can't wait to see it!!! I think it sounds incredible.

[Sexy Celebrity]

I'm just playing with you, Rodent. It's not real. I made it all up. But you probably already knew that.

[The Rodent]

Review #202, Movie #272
The Bone Collector

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/31/Bone_collector_poster.jpg


Year Of Release
1999

Director
Phillip Noyce

Producer
Martin Bregman, Michael Bregman

Writer
Jeremy Iacone, Jeffrey Deaver

Cast
Denzel Washington, Angelina Jolie, Queen Latifah, Leland Orser, Luis Guzmán and Michael Rooker

Notes
Even though the main villain is never revealed until the end and when seen during the running time always remains hidden under a balaclava... to throw the audience off the scent, other actors actually portrayed the villain while masked, which gives more weight and surprise to the actual revealing.


---


Veteran Cop and forensics genius Lincoln Rhyme is injured in the line of duty that leaves him almost completely paralysed, with only his head, neck and one finger capable of moving.
He spends his days in his apartment with a Nurse and uses a voice activated computer to keep himself occupied. He has cut off his family too through a sense of fear and pride about his debilitating condition.
Rhyme is also pushing for a legal suicide as some of the fits he suffers will one day turn him completely into a "vegetable"... which is something he fears more than anything else in the world.

When a highly complex serial killer appears in the city, Rhyme's ex-bosses appear and ask for his brilliant mind to help track where the killer will strike next...

... and reluctantly, Rhyme along with rookie Beat-Cop Amelia Donaghy as his "legs", he puts his genius to work, all the time talking with Amelia through a telephone headset as she follows his instructions through the streets of New York.



Based on the book of the same name, The Bone Collector could have been brilliant.
Sadly though, it's a highly linear turn of events that holds some great promising mystery at the start but manages to drop the build up in place of some straight forward shocks and disturbing ideas that feel like a poorly made Se7en wannabe.


The general premise of the story is sound. It's just the hap-hazard direction from behind the camera that lets it down.
Phillip Noyce, who was involved with Dead Calm (1989), Patriot Games (1992) and Clear And Present Danger (1994), it's kind of surprising that The Bone Collector is so bland overall, really.

Some of it works, yet most of it just feels there for the sake of it with little regard to actually following it up with any kind of actual moments of discovery... and even those that are shown are slapped down with pretty linear writing in the script.


The acting though is top drawer.
Denzel Washington is as usual, the confident, slightly troubled detective with a brilliant mind. And seeing as Washington is actually in only one location throughout the entire film, laying on a bed, he does an exceptional job. He also plays the genius type with pure conviction. Well played.

Angelina Jolie is the heroine Amelia Donaghy... definitely Jolie's most likeable role to date. At least this time round she doesn't just pout and try to look sexy... she has to actually act and does a very good job of it.
She hold the more emotional scenes well too.

Queen Latifah is also on board too. Now, Latifah is one of the worst actresses in living memory, yet here she seems comfortable in the role and makes an impression as Rhyme's Nurse. She's also incredibly likeable for the small amount of screen time she gets. If anything, I actually wanted to see more of her role.

Back up comes from Ed (Al Bundy) O'Neill and Luis Guzman as Cop friends of Rhyme's and underrated actor Leland Orser as a technician for Rhyme's life support machines.


There's little to no action as such, but there are some great effects and gore thrown in to make the subject matter work better. There are some beautiful set pieces involved.
Apart from some CGI rats though, they sucked.
The rest of the visual design of the film is top notch though. The sets and general atmosphere is worked on really well.


---


All in all... atmospheric in look, had a promising story and the actors worked out of their socks... but it was let down with a linear and almost lazy script and screenplay.
Worth a go if you like "whodunits?", but if you're after a top class whodunit that's mysterious and brooding like maybe Se7en... you'll feel a bit let down.

My rating: 68%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleR5050StampNew_zps36b9d868.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleR5050StampNew_zps36b9d868.png.html)

[Sexy Celebrity]

http://31.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_ls9dzg2cll1qczq24o1_500.gif

[The Rodent]

WTF is that?

[Sexy Celebrity]

I think it's Queen Latifah doing a turn.

[edarsenal]

i remember seeing all the potentials of what really should have been a great film only be so-so. Not bad, but not one you rave to a friend to go watch but simply shrug and tell 'em "Yeah, sure, that one's okay."

[JayDee]

Bone Collector is one of those films I've been aware of and been meaning to watch for years now, but never enough that I've actually gotten round to it yet. Even though I picked the DVD up for £2 a few years back.



Where are you at now then?

My Quills review made it 191 I think. As I said though I've got enough stored up that I could have stolen your thunder by getting to 200 first, but didn't think that would be gentlemanly of me. :D

[The Rodent]

I'll have to make a start on some franchises... 3, 4, 5, 6 films in one review to bump my numbers :D

I've got 4 franchises in mind which will make 18 movies over 4 reviews.

[Sexy Celebrity]

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=11612&stc=1&d=1383008065

[The Rodent]

Now that, is a pic.

[Sexy Celebrity]

I'll leave the two of you alone, then.

[The Rodent]

Just a shame Tunstall isn't in there.

[The Rodent]

I recently got my hands on the Star Trek box set and the JJ Abrams reboot as well. I also made a bit of a splash in the Shoutbox when I brought attention to my harsh original ratings of the franchise.
My original review of the franchise is not only missing Into Darkness as it hadn’t been made at that time, but also contained only short reviews of each Star Trek film.

I’ve revisited a few films in the past, for instance I reviewed Jurassic Park but not the sequels, then re-ran my JP review alongside the follow ups.
But this time, for the first time, I’m rewriting one of my reviews, hopefully bettering it, and adding the most recent release at the same time.


This is broken into 2 parts as the overall review is too large for the forum :D



The Rodent Revises
Review #82 (Page 10)
The Star Trek Franchise Part 1

The Motion Picture

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/df/Star_Trek_The_Motion_Picture_poster.png

Year Of Release
1979

Director
Robert Wise

Producer
Gene Roddenberry, Jon Povill

Writer
Gene Roddenberry, Alan Dean Foster, Harold Livingston,

Cast
William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, Nichelle Nichols, Walter Koenig, George Takei, James Doohan, Stephen Collins and Persis Khambatta

---

A massive energy cloud advances toward Earth, leaving destruction in its wake, and the Enterprise must intercept it to determine what lies within, and what its intent might be.


After a long absence from anything new and audiences having to make do with reruns of the TV series, demand for more Star Trek was yearned by fans.

What we got was a pretty outlandish set of events but something that set the tone for the franchise.
The writing is fantastic, it combines a more serious side to the mildest touch of the campness that was seen in the TV series, and still makes the audience feel excited.
It starts out relatively mysterious, allowing for the audience to take grasp of the strange situation, after all, all this time away from the screen it meant the audience could have been easily lost in the strange happenings and outlandish ideas.

The screenplay is a little touch and go throughout but it works with the tone of the film. There are occasional slips in the storytelling but they’re hardly noticeable.
The humour is another touch-and-go subject. Most of it comes from in-house humour between the cast, mainly between Kirk, Bones and Spock.
But you feel included in the little back and forth conversations and the humour itself never changes itself around from being either one thing or another; it stays constant throughout.

What makes the film really work though is definitely the chemistry between the actors. Not seen on screen greatly between the TV series and the movie, they still have a friendly and pally atmosphere about them.
It's just like old friends doing what they do best after many years away from each other, which makes the performances from all involved shine through wonderfully.

The effects also, still stand out today and gladly, are a billion times better than the series ever gave the fans.
Some of the visuals are highly 70s and experimental though. Shiny sparkly light effects and so on when something unexplainable is happening but, along with the far-out story, it adds its own authenticity to the proceedings.
The model and miniature effects are top notch and haven’t aged though at all.

---

All in all, it's a welcome return to the screen for original fans and has stood the test of time for well over 30 years with a newer audience. Also over the past 3 decades, it has found younger audiences and introduced millions of movie goers to science fiction film.

My rating: 91%

http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)






The Wrath Of Khan

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9a/Star_Trek_II_The_Wrath_of_Khan.png

Year Of Release
1982

Director
Nicholas Meyer

Producer
Robert Stallin, William F Phillips, Harve Bennett

Writer
Gene Roddenberry, Harve Bennett, Jack B Sowards, Samuel A Peeples, Nicholas Meyer, Ramon Sanchez

Cast
William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, Nichelle Nichols, Walter Koenig, George Takei, James Doohan and Ricardo Montalban

---

Khan Noonien Singh, whom Kirk thwarted in his attempt to seize control of the Enterprise fifteen years earlier seeks his revenge and lays a cunning and sinister trap.


Another welcome turn to the screen for fans, and so far the best of the bunch.
The writing is top notch and the creases of the first movie have been ironed completely out.
This film feels much more professional, for want of a better word, in terms of overall finish.
The filmmakers also had the gumption to bring back a heavy hitting villain from the TV series too, rather than just the separate adventure that the first movie gave us.
It adds a much more fleshed out story and makes for a more personal battle for the crew of The Enterprise.
Khan himself has often been labelled as The Enterprise’s most dangerous adversary. It shows throughout the running time too and gets the audience deeply involved.

There are a couple of plot holes between the TV series and the big screen outing, but again, as a fault, they can be overlooked. The TV series was hardly strict on continuity itself, tbh.
What does make a difference is that this film was brave in some of the scripting and plots that are involved.

The acting from all parties is ramped up in this one too.
Ghosts of the past and certain things going wrong for the main group of characters really give the cast something to get their teeth into dramatically and it makes the movie all the more potent for it.
The one-two between Khan and Kirk makes for some great theatrical cinema and some of the most recognisable and quotable scenes in cinematic history.

Ricardo Montalban as Khan though is by far the most memorable actor in the film. Not just for the fact it's his character that is in the title though, it's his sheer enthusiasm and charisma in the role that makes the audience both love and hate him. He also brings an element of campness to the role that has been missed so far since the original TV series.

The effects are also improved massively. There are still the occasional slips in general rendering when it comes to the rotoscoping etc, but compared to the first film and other films since, Wrath was really the benchmark for the Trek Franchise in terms of excitement, style and choreography.

---

All in all, a vast improvement over the first movie and an absolute joyride of melodrama, peril and humour.
There’s also an incredibly bold and emotional ending to the film that makes Wrath stand out from the others.

My rating: 96%

http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)





The Search For Spock

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b6/Star_Trek_III_The_Search_for_Spock.png

Year Of Release
1984

Director
Leonard Nimoy

Producer
Harve Bennett, Gary Nardino, Ralph Winter

Writer
Gene Roddenberry, Harve Bennett

Cast
William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, Nichelle Nichols, Walter Koenig, George Takei, James Doohan, Merritt R Butrick, Dame Judith Anderson, Robin Curtis and Christopher Lloyd

---

When McCoy begins acting irrationally, Kirk learns that Spock, in his final moments, transferred his katra, his living spirit, to the doctor. In order to save McCoy from emotional ruin, Kirk and crew must steal the Enterprise and violate the quarantine of Genesis to retrieve Spock's body from the rapidly dying planet, in the hopes that body and soul can be re-joined. Bent on obtaining the secret of Genesis for themselves, however, a rogue Klingon and his crew interfere, with deadly consequences.


The third of the franchise makes for extremely downbeat viewing, and then extremely mixed emotionally toward the end.

What gets me though, is that the strange and unbelievable set of events surrounding the Genesis Planet and Spock are also, strangely, very believable due to the way the screenplay is put together. Thumbs up for that I say. That couldn't have been an easy task for the filmmakers.
What the writers and producers have managed to do is take the outlandish ideas and essences that were behind the TV series and even to an extent The Motion Picture… and then run with it and have fun along the way in terms of playfulness with the suspension of disbelief and character arcs.

Acting as a “part 2” to the second movie really makes this one stand out though. It also makes the viewer feel all the more connected to the emotional struggle of the characters.
There are also more deaths involved that makes for even more emotional content to get the viewer rooting for the main cast to succeed.

The cast too are on top form with the script and really show their worth in the series of events.
The movie itself has many levels of emotion for Kirk too. Shatner really stands out in the film because of the events happening around him.
Christopher Lloyd adds his own element of theatricality to the mix as well as a Klingon baddie. I was dubious about Lloyd but his different style of acting adds its own element of villainy to a role that could have been just a generic bad guy.

The effects are about the same as the second film. There are some improvements in terms of the rendering but they’re still recognisable when put alongside the first two films.
The model work and miniatures have been upped though and you can see more time has been taken in the model shop.

---

All in all, what starts out as a relatively sombre and downbeat adventure turns to an exciting but quite emotionally driven ending.

The use of far-out ideas of resurrection alongside some other playful and knowingly farfetched occurrences makes The Search For Spock a better throwback to the original TV series than the other films so far, and is done with a style that fits into the film series perfectly.

My rating: 89%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)


The Voyage Home

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/68/Star_Trek_IV_The_Voyage_Home.png

Year Of Release
1986

Director
Leonard Nimoy

Producer
Harve Bennett, Ralph Winter, Kirk Thatcher, Brooke Breton

Writer
Gene Roddenberry, Harve Bennett, Nicholas Meyer, Leonard Nimoy, Steve Meerson, Peter Krikes

Cast
William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, Nichelle Nichols, Walter Koenig, George Takei, James Doohan and Catherine Hicks

---

While returning to stand court-martial for their actions in rescuing Spock, Kirk and crew learn that Earth is under the siege of a giant probe transmitting a destructive signal, intended for the long-extinct species of humpback whales. To save the planet, the crew must time-travel back to the 20th century to obtain a mating pair of these whales, along with a biologist to care for them.


Acting as a “Part 3” by continuing Spock's story arc that started in The Wrath Of Khan, the cast being side-tracked from their return to Earth could have been an exciting and worthwhile adventure through space.

Sadly, The Voyage Home is laden with fish-out-of-water jokes and way too much comedy replacing the mild humour of the first three movies.
It's also very cliché and cheesy to the point that it's beginning to tilt too much toward the original TV series. The Search For Spock started to do it, but Voyage is beginning to just cross that line too far.

Though in saying that, the movie as it is, is still entertaining enough for any Star Trek fan and anyone who has enjoyed the lead up will experience a relatively welcome breath of fresh air after the downbeat third movie. The humour involved makes for a very different movie altogether.
It feels like a product of its time with all the Save The Whales nonsense going on, but Voyage manages to draw the audience in without getting too mawkish and sickly in its themes.

The acting is good enough for the tone of the film and to be honest, I think the cast are in the same situation as the audience and seem to be enjoying the over-used humour.
In particular, it’s nice to see other cast members get the limelight instead of just being Kirk, Bones and Spock. We’re treated to Walter Koenig and Nichelle Nichols on their own little side mission… and James Doohan alongside DeForest Kelley and George Takei have their own mission to accomplish too.
Koenig in particular makes the most of his time in the limelight, he’s incredibly funny and cleverly draws on the humour with his natural childlike innocence.

The effects of the movie are somewhat improved again in this one. The miniature work and animation work involved is top notch for the time (1986) and still works today.
The filmmakers have also kept a recognisable essence to the effects as well that tie the highly different feel of the film to the other films in the series.

---

All in all, more humour oriented but does make for a nice upbeat change from the sombre predecessor. It’s just that the humour is laid on too thick in some scenes and the overly used humour does get dull at times.

Bordering product-of-its-time territory with the main plot but is handled well and never gets OTT in terms of the actual message it’s trying to send. Definitely the most fun of TOS.

My rating: 87%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleR5050StampNew_zps36b9d868.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleR5050StampNew_zps36b9d868.png.html)




The Final Frontier

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7c/Star_Trek_V_The_Final_Frontier.png

Year Of Release
1989

Director
William Shatner

Producer
Gene Roddenberry, Harve Bennett, Ralph Winter, Brooke Breton

Writer
Gene Roddenberry, Harve Bennett, William Shatner, David Loughery

Cast
William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, Nichelle Nichols, Walter Koenig, George Takei, James Doohan and Lawrence Luckinbill

---

A man called Sybok believes he is summoned by God, and hijacks the brand-new (and problem-ridden) Enterprise-A to take it through the Great Barrier, at the centre of the Milky Way, beyond which he believes his maker waits for him. Meanwhile, an ambitious young Klingon captain, seeking vengeance for the deaths of the Klingon crewmen at Genesis, sets his sights on Kirk.


This time around, the audience is treated to a more action and peril orientated movie.
There's a great villain and a ghost from the past for the Enterprise's crew to deal with, and there are certain elements of expansion for certain characters too.

It makes for a more rounded plot throughout and the acting involved, especially between Spock and Kirk, is all the more realistic and at times has humour laced throughout rather than just there for the sake of it.

What does let it down though is that some of the ideas involved in the plot, particularly the ending, are so farfetched that they border unbelievable. The film does go toward the feeling of the original movie and TV series. It's definitely leaning toward the outlandish feel of The Motion Picture… it’s just that it went over the line between fantasy and reality just a little too much.

Having Shatner at the helm of this one really shows too. Shatner may be an awesome Captain… but he’s not really cut out for directing a large scale Trek movie. His direction works in the smaller scenes, but as things get progressively larger during the running time, his skills as a Director begin to show their limits.

The acting involved throughout though is at its best. Lawrence Luckinbill deserves special mention for his role as Sybok. He's not a baddy as such, it's just that his demented and doughy-eyed persona and personal neediness putting everyone around him at risk makes him stand out among the cast.

The effects in this one are used with a little more panache than the predecessors, especially toward the end with some of the sparkly shiny lighting effects once used in The Motion Picture, but they do work with the subject at hand.

---

All in all, not the perfect Trek movie, but certainly enjoyable and has that element of the TV series going on and has some nicely placed backstory going on too.

It could have been more exciting though if Shatner had just a little more talent behind the camera.

My rating: 76%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleR5050StampNew_zps36b9d868.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleR5050StampNew_zps36b9d868.png.html)




The Undiscovered Country

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fa/Star_Trek_VI-poster.png

Year Of Release
1991

Director
Nicholas Meyer

Producer
Ralph Winter, Brooke Breton, Steven-Charles Jaffe, Marty Hornstein

Writer
Gene Roddenberry, Nicholas Meyer, Leonard Nimoy, Lawrence Konner, Mark Rosenthal, Denny Martin Flinn

Cast
William Shatner, Leonard Nimoy, DeForest Kelley, Nichelle Nichols, Walter Koenig, George Takei, James Doohan, Kim Cattrall, David Warner, Rosanna DeSoto, Iman, Michael Dorn and Christopher Plummer

---

After their home world is wracked by an environmental disaster, the Klingons attempt to make peace with the Federation. When the Klingon Chancellor is assassinated, the crew of the Enterprise must race against time to uncover a massive conspiracy against the peace process, with plotters from both sides, led by Klingon General Chang, working with each other.


This is the Marmite movie for fans of the original movies series.
Many have labelled Country as a bland film that is lacking the fantastical side of the Trek that many are accustomed to.

Looking at it the way it is though, it's actually a very entertaining adventure.
The writing of the plotline and the screenplay are also good. They add some sombre scenes to back up some of the more theatrical battles that occasionally take place, but Country is really more of a wind-down for the series.

If anything, it's much better written than The Final Frontier and far outweighs The Voyage Home in terms of tone and feel.

The welcome twist with this one is the murder-mystery “whodunit?” that the crew have to figure out while Kirk and Bones are under arrest.
The other thing that works brilliantly is the way the film's plot is unravelled by the characters and the way it plays out for the audience.
The whole film plays out like one long voyage of discovery for the audience and never lets up in terms of mystery.

The humour involved is also the kind that works, friendly, tongue in cheek and occasionally cheeky.

Another plus is that we have Nicholas Meyer behind the camera again. Meyer was the Director behind Wrath Of Khan… and Meyer’s ability to turn up the tension and still keep within the boundaries of reality and fantasy really show in the finished product.

What lets the film down though is the slight cheesiness of the “everyone should love one another” message that is laid on thick at the end. Now, ok this is a message that Star Trek has laid on since Year Dot… but Country does get a little mawkish within the last 15 minutes.

The effects are massively improved in this outing though. Though they're used sparingly they work brilliantly and the general rendering throughout is top notch.
Gladly though, like with all of the other movies leading up to this one, the effects budget was spared… and it makes for a nice ending to the Trek we’ve all come to know and love since 1979.

---

All in all, a fitting end to the adventures of Kirk's crew. Upbeat and entertaining.

It’s nice to see TOS go out with a well choreographed, well written and well acted Spectacular that gives not just a few thrills and spills, but also something the audience can get their minds working with as well due to the murder-mystery elements that are laid on throughout.

My rating: 89%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[The Rodent]

The Rodent Revises


Review #82 (Page 10)



The Star Trek Franchise Part 2




Generations

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/f5/S07-Star_Trek_Generations-poster_art.png

Year Of Release
1994

Director
David Carson

Producer
Bernie Williams, Rick Berman, Peter Lauritson

Writer
Gene Roddenberry, Rick Berman, Ronald D Moore, Brannon Braga

Cast
Patrick Stewart, Jonathan Frakes, Brent Spiner, LeVar Burton, Michael Dorn, Gates McFadden, Marina Sirtis, Alan Ruck, Whoopi Goldberg, William Shatner, James Doohan, Walter Koenig and Malcolm McDowell

---

Picard enlists the services of Kirk, who is presumed long dead but flourishes in an extra dimensional realm, to prevent a madman from destroying a star and its planetary system in an attempt to enter that realm.


What started as an anticipated movie comes an odd turn of events that left the audience wondering why.
It's more of a novelty act really. After audiences had gotten used to The Next Generation on their TV sets and the fact that The Undiscovered Country had been made and released when TNG was already going, the filmmakers decided that a handover between Kirk and Picard was needed for the stake in the movie franchise.

Ok the movie as a whole works, but it feels more of a “written for the sake it” movie in certain parts.

The action and choreography is top notch though and you can't help but get excited when Kirk and Picard are fighting alongside each other for the greater good, but it's the circumstances leading up to the pact, and the circumstances surrounding Kirk's actual presence that let the movie down.
It works to an extent, in the realms of Star Trek's Universe the audience has seen much more unbelievable things and have accepted them as they happened.

It is fun to see the crossover and the general story has that element of the outlandish and fantasy based essence going on… but to be completely honest, it would have worked without having Kirk involved. As I said, it’s more for the sake of having Kirk in there to make the handover.

The acting is highly recognisable though. The regular crew by now knew their roles inside out and the cheesiness of the first few episodes of TNG’s TV series have been ironed out by now… and the cast are making the best they can with their screen time.
It’s great to see the cast on the big screen in a big budgeted story.
Malcolm McDowell makes for a decent villain. He starts out quite mysterious and isn’t seen a massive amount throughout, but as his character is revealed, his unbending quest to get what he wants becomes quite a disturbing series of self-obsessed shenanigans.

The effects are absolutely top drawer though. It’s extremely hard to not get excited and drawn in while watching.
This time round we have cutting edge computer effects (cutting edge for the time) mixed with model and miniature work and it gives a huge edge over the first 6 Trek films. It also manages to tie in with the original films and the TNG TV series as well with general style.

---

All in all, more of a passing of the torch kind of movie. Sadly though, it almost didn't work. It’s nice to see the physical handover, but it could have worked without it.

Still though, Generations is worthy of the Trek title and has fantasy based outlandishness in bucket loads mixed with decent effects, exciting action and well written characters.

My rating: 82%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)


First Contact

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/dd/Star_Trek_08-poster.png

Year Of Release
1996

Director
Jonathan Frakes

Producer
Marty Hornstein, Rick Berman, Peter Lauritson,

Writer
Gene Roddenberry, Rick Berman, Ronald D Moore, Brannon Braga

Cast
Patrick Stewart, Jonathan Frakes, Brent Spiner, LeVar Burton, Michael Dorn, Gates McFadden, Marina Sirtis, Neal McDonough, James Cromwell, Alfre Woodard and Alice Krige

---

The Borg attempt to enslave humanity in the past, before First Contact between Terrans and Vulcans; Picard must fight his demons from his assimilation into the Collective as he leads the Enterprise-E back in time to ensure that Zephram Cochrane's first warp test and subsequent meeting of the extra-terrestrials take place.


Sadly, this movie pushes close to mediocre.
The plotline could have been super-exciting, especially involving The Borg going back into the past and changing things around but sadly all the audience got was a small scale actioner that's laden with badly written humour; namely seeing Counsellor Troy drunk and Zephram Cochran being more of a comedy relief once Data is captured by The Borg.

The added extra of Picard and his past dealings with The Borg could have been worthwhile too, but, it wasn't really utilised very well. It just boils down to Picard looking for revenge rather than to bury demons of his past.

The places that work though are the general storyline and plot and the writing overall when it comes to emotions of the characters. Having The Borg try their best to change Earth’s past by time travelling, it makes for a tense situation that the audience can get behind and cheer on Picard and his crew.
The dialogue and more sombre scenes, particularly between Picard and Lily Sloan make for some nice scenes that portray Picard as a little more human than he’s ever been seen before.

Which brings me to the acting.
It’s more about Patrick Stewart facing his Borg past and James Cromwell becoming something he doesn’t want to be. Cromwell however is a completely different character to the Zephram Cochran we saw in the TNG TV series. He’s also annoying at times; which is not good for a main character really.
Stewart holds it together well though and we at last see him lose his temper more than once while Picard gets stressed by the whole situation.

Alice Krige though is the standout role as The Borg Queen. Krige is absolutely on top form as a half living half machine entity that tries her best to twist Data against his roots. Krige’s natural ability to be disturbing without even trying is perfect for the role.

Sadly, another downer is that the effects seem low in budget. In fact, even lower than the TV series.
Most of the film is based in a forest on Earth, so there's no real area for a budget to be spent and some of the sets are as wobbly as the original 1960s TV series.

When seen though, the computer and miniature effects departments worked out of their socks to get the shots needed. It’s just a shame that the sets and general setting was a let-down.
Another thing, is that, how did a bunch of hermits living in tents in a forest manage to build a 300ft space vehicle that has warp capability?

---

All in all, the weakest of the series but could have been magnificent.
The storyline was used relatively well, and there are tons of character driven plots going on that make First Contact probably the most personal and interpersonal film of the lot, even over Wrath Of Khan.
The acting is also top notch.

Sadly, it ended up looking low in budget, had some annoying characters and the occasional plot that makes no sense at all, even for a Trek film.
It’s also not as exciting as it should have been given the premise.

My rating: 71%

http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)



Insurrection

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8e/Star_Trek_IX.jpg

Year Of Release
1998

Director
Jonathan Frakes

Producer
Marty Hornstein, Rick Berman, Peter Lauritson, Patrick Stewart, Michael Piller

Writer
Gene Roddenberry, Rick Berman, Michael Piller

Cast
Patrick Stewart, Jonathan Frakes, Brent Spiner, LeVar Burton, Michael Dorn, Gates McFadden, Marina Sirtis, Donna Murphy, Anthony Zerbe and F Murray Abraham

---

The crew of the Enterprise launch a rebellion on the Baku home world against Picard’s superior officer, Admiral Dougherty, and his Son'a cohort, Ru'afo who want to relocate the Baku to gain possession of the medicinal cosmic radiation that floods their planet.


This is more like it. The filmmakers gladly learned from their mistakes and actually wrote a proper story this time round based solely on the premise of The Prime Directive.
It's pretty simplistic but certainly imaginative, has many never before seen ideas, and original characters involved throughout that add depth to the story being told raher than just having them there for the sake of it.

The other thing is use of ideas that we are all familiar with but used in ways that make us raise an eyebrow as well, namely with the use of Holo-deck Technology.

The other plus point is the expanded relationships between the crew members and Picard finding a love interest.
Seeing Picard make a more emotional and traditional connection with a member of the opposite sex is a really nice touch to the story that adds a real connection to his character.
Other characters are built on too… Data and his learning of how children play and how youngsters view the world and Riker and Troy having their relationship built on and so on.
It feels much more like a soap style script that builds character rather than just having our beloved cast being all samey again.

Jonathan Frakes seems to have learned a few lessons as well from directing the previous film First Contact and has improved somewhat considerably.


Some standout roles are Patrick Stewart and Donna Murphy in their blossoming love story. They’re highly engaging and have massive charisma.

The main standout role though is F Murray Abraham as villainous Son’a leader Ahdar Ru'afo. His role isn’t just that of a basic bad guy for the sake of it either, his role comes alive in the third act that gives more depth to his reasons for his villainy.


The action is a touch more toned down for a Star Trek movie, it's more about small skirmishes and running and hiding but it's the story, and especially the acting involved that make the movie watchable.

This was the first time as well that Star Trek used full on CGI effects while the outer space sequences were put together, there are no models or miniatures used at all. The thing is, also, you can’t tell. They’re smooth, rendered extremely well and never fail to impress.

---

All in all an improvement, still not perfect but they're getting there.

The broadened character writing and a little playfulness on behalf of the cast make Insurrection probably the most universally watchable of the series, and the overall premise makes for some nice audience-character connections.

My rating: 84%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)


Nemesis

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9c/Star_Trek_Nemesis_poster.jpg

Year Of Release
2002

Director
Stuart Baird

Producer
Marty Hornstein, Rick Berman, Peter Lauritson

Writer
Gene Roddenberry, Rick Berman, John Logan, Brent Spiner

Cast
Patrick Stewart, Jonathan Frakes, Brent Spiner, LeVar Burton, Michael Dorn, Gates McFadden, Marina Sirtis, Ron Perlman, Dina Meyer and Tom Hardy

---

Picard and company must thwart a seemingly familiar enemy, who has become leader of Romulus and is bent on obtaining DNA from Picard, at the cost of the captain's life, as well as the Federation's and Earth’s destruction by using a new and immensely deadly weapon.


Once again, another Marmite movie for fans.
Nemesis is certainly more action orientated but contains a nice little twist in both Picard's past, and his fate.

The main plot of the film revolves around haunted histories, bettering yourself and has oodles of sentimental value. It's written perfectly though, it doesn't go into the 'cheesy' territory that The Undiscovered Country went into.

A lot of people have slammed Nemesis for lack of originality and bad dialogue. It’s true, the dialogue is unbelievable at times, but the overall premise that deals with almost a family feud is, I find, the most interesting aspect of Nemesis. It also adds a nice touch of mysticism into things that have happened in the past with Picard and his adventures.

Another thing with the film is that director Stuart Baird had never seen any Star Trek episode and it does show quite a lot. The overall feel of the film has little resemblance to the Treks we’ve all seen before.
It’s not an awfully bad thing though, it makes the movie stand apart with the darker and more brooding set pieces seen throughout.


The overall acting from all parties is another plus point. They successful encapsulate their characters in the strange set of circumstances and show the humour, and especially the tragedy, absolutely brilliantly.

What really stands out in the film though is a young Tom Hardy as the antagonist and his right hand man played by Ron Perlman.
They're absolutely brilliant throughout and very good as villains. Hardy in particular shines in the near-dual-role.


The effects are absolutely top notch too. Some of the action scenes are very exciting and you can finally, at last, see where the budgets were spent too.
The CGI has been improved a hell of a lot, even over Insurrection.

---

All in all, a rather downbeat but almost inspiring end to The Next Generation's legend. Still not perfect but definitely, personally for me, the most exciting of TNG's films in story and action.

My rating: 84%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)


Star Trek

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/29/Startrekposter.jpg

Year Of Release
2009

Director
JJ Abrams

Producer
JJ Abrams, Bryan Burk, Jeffrey Chernov, Alex Kurtzman, Damon Lindelof, Roberto Orci, David Baronoff, David Witz

Writer
Gene Roddenberry, Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman

Cast
Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Karl Urban, Zoe Saldana, Anton Yelchin, John Cho, Simon Pegg, Eric Bana, Bruce Greenwood and Leonard Nimoy

---

When Vulcan is destroyed by Romulan thugs from the future, led by Nero, young Kirk and Spock must set aside their differences to prevent Earth from suffering the same fate.


Upon hearing about this movie I was extremely dubious. Before seeing the film I had the impression of it being a big middle finger to all the stalwart fans of Trek's history.

What the audience has been given though is a massively impressive rewrite of Star Trek lore and a brilliantly pieced together movie.

What makes the biggest impression is the cast involved. Chris Pine as Kirk, Zachary Quinto as Spock and Zoe Saldana as Uhura are extremely natural in the well-known roles and certainly don't let the viewer down.

The story though is relatively simple. It's the typical Trek Time Travel plot but it's extremely well written and effective.
It also adds more depth to the viewing when you realise the effect that the time travelling has had on the main character's lives.

The effects are absolutely bang on the money too. It's almost entirely CGI backgrounds and green-screen but it's handled with such style and substance, it gives the movie its own aura.
The action too, though pitched at regular intervals isn't too over the top and certainly not boring either. It's balanced just right.

The nostalgic elements are another plus on the writing front. The film is very loyal to the Trek everyone knows and loves.

By far the stand out piece of the film is Eric Bana as Nero. He's brilliantly evil and really threatening as a baddy.

---

All in all a massive surprise, but definitely in a good way, very nostalgic and loyal, and an exciting movie when the action kicks in.

My rating: 97%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)


And now... for the addition...

Review #203, Movie #273
Into Darkness

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/50/StarTrekIntoDarkness_FinalUSPoster.jpg

Year Of Release
2013

Director
JJ Abrams

Producer
JJ Abrams, Bryan Burk, Jeffrey Chernov, Alex Kurtzman, Damon Lindelof, Roberto Orci

Writer
Gene Roddenberry, Roberto Orci, Alex Kurtzman, Damon Lindelof

Cast
Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Karl Urban, Zoe Saldana, Anton Yelchin, John Cho, Simon Pegg, Peter Weller, Bruce Greenwood and Benedict Cumberbatch

---

After Kirk loses command of The Enterprise through Spock’s by-the-books ways, a dangerous and unstable adversary appears on the horizon and makes it his mission to wipe out the Heads of Starfleet.
Kirk and Spock must reconcile their differences and Kirk must take genuine responsibility for once in his life and find out who this mysterious enemy is before he causes Starfleet to go to war with the Klingons.


Ok, starting out immensely strong with Star Trek (2009), JJ and his team of writers have decided the best thing to do is not just completely rewrite history, which is kind of warranted given the premise, but they have taken the olde backstories of Trek and mixed the timelines up completely.

There has been a ton of complaints about Into Darkness and the lack of originality involved and the lack of imagination too…

I say though, ID is as strong as, if not stronger and definitely braver than the original 2009 film ever was.
The way I view the overall story is that the timelines and fate itself, are trying to resort themselves after Nero, the villain in Star Trek, messed things up so badly by time travelling.

The filmmakers have taken a ton of recognisable elements from almost every original episode of Trek and from the 6 original films too and mashed them together into a joy filled cake of action, thrills, spills and some of the most emotional scenes I’ve ever witnessed in Trek.

They’ve also added some nice character arcs throughout too, mainly with Kirk and his lack of respect for authority and with Spock always doing things by the book.
There are a number of scenes with the message that these guys need to get their heads together… a fault sometimes is that they do occasionally get too thick at times with the message, it occasionally feels forced.

This film is a lot less humorous than the 2009 outing though. It’s a more serious take on the Trek Lore but never bombards the audience too much with action and explosions.


The acting is bang on though again. The actors are much more comfortable this time round and have warmed to the roles brilliantly. Simon Pegg has improved massively too.

The standout role though, has to be Benedict Cumberbatch as the villain. I was dubious to start with but Cumberbatch’s natural professional theatrical style has massive impact when set against the new actors in the roles of Kirk, Spock, Scotty and the rest of the crew.
They play off each other brilliantly and tbh, if it wasn’t for Cumberbatch, this film probably wouldn’t have worked as well.


The effects though, as with the last outing in 2009, are top of the game; highly exciting, immensely well rendered in the CGI stakes and full of detail.
The action as well is top notch and extremely well choreographed and there are a few surprises thrown in as well in terms of character fates.

---

All in all, more exciting than the 2009 film and a story that makes an incredible impact. Lacking in originality at times, but done purposely to make the premise recognisable and it makes it exciting too.

An improvement over Abrams’ original though? Only ever so slightly, so I’m keeping with the same rating for this one.

My rating: 97%
http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png.html)

[mark f]

I own a Star Trek franchise. Our biggest-selling meal is a replicated Big Mac Combo.

[The Rodent]

Time for me to be a rep whore like JayDee...

I've been repped for Part 2 but not for Part 1?
Are my reviews not as good for the original series?

[Mmmm Donuts]

Time for me to be a rep whore like JayDee...


Naw, you're a bit classier than that. You're only a rep slut. :)

I read the 2nd set of reviews first, because I've seen 2 of those movies, thus that got repped first. Very good reviews though.

[edarsenal]

reps alone for such a massive endeavor alone.
Gonna have to come back and read it all, should be pretty cool

[Mmmm Donuts]

9 reps each! Are you not entertained, Rodent?

[The Rodent]

They're doing better than the original reviews :)

I got only 5 reps for that one. I didn't really think I'd added that much to them in the rewrite either, as the first time I got the whole lot into one post... looking back though, I think I more than doubled the word count for the rewrite.


Thanks everyone for reading over them though, I'm rather proud of my Trek DVD collection now I've got the whole lot, and am really thankful my revision has been met with such encouragement.

[JayDee]

I've been repped for Part 2 but not for Part 1?
Are my reviews not as good for the original series?

:facepalm: How shameless and pathetic! Whining and bitching about people not repping you enough. :nope: Show some dignity man!


On a completely unrelated note I'd like to invite everyone to drop by JayDee's Movie Musings (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=983213#post983213). A thread where the welcome is warm, the reviews are plentiful and rep is mandatory! :p

[The Rodent]

But JayDee has never reviewed anything so large it takes 2 posts to fit it in.