Rodent's Reviews [Archive] - Page 4

The Rodent

11-09-13, 01:18 AM

Review #204, Movie #274
Chopper

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

Year Of Release
2000

Director
Andrew Dominik

Producer
Michele Bennett

Writer
Mark Chopper Read, Andrew Dominik

Cast
Eric Bana, Vince Colosimo, Simon Lyndon, Kate Beahan, David Field

Notes
Eric Bana's debut film propelled him to stardom. But the film had a few setbacks.
One was during the prison scenes as the prison itself was going to be shut down during negotiations between the filmmakers and the prison itself. As a result, the funding was pulled and held back the start date for shooting. We almost didn't get Bana's career making breakthrough.

Also, the film's stylised visuals were purposely made in such a way that the sterile prison seen in the first half, and the overly colourful second half of the film, would give stark contrasts to one another and added an incredible sense of paranoia and chaos, or sterile correctional facility order, in the audience's head depending on the scene.

---

Australian criminal Mark Brandon Read, aka Chopper, flitting between petty theft and minor assault, to kidnap, violent robbery and even murder, Mark makes a name for himself over time in the 1980s and 1990s... eventually making enemies everywhere he goes by beating, torturing, robbing and murdering drug dealers, gang members and junkies...

... and becoming one of the most wanted men in Australian history, both by the law and from warring factions of gangs and petty criminals to even his friends that he's crossed.

---

An incredibly unsettling turn of acting from Eric Bana brings to life what appears on the surface as a far out and occasionally excessive brutal story of crime and punishment.

Look a little deeper though, Chopper is a relatively complex nest of boxes that is easy to follow and never fails to impress no matter how many times you see it.
One thing the film manages to do is cross fantasy with reality very successfully.

Labelled as a Biopic, the film is more of a Biography crossed with some hokum and make-believe that gives the impression that the input from Chopper Read himself played a part in the production.
It also adds weight to Chopper's character too. Throughout the film he flits from lying through his teeth and making up fantastic stories, to telling the truth no matter how bizarre it may sound and the overall playfulness with the script adds a brilliant depth to the story and Chopper's overall character.

The way the character is unravelled is also well written, and his rise to fame is shown in small detail, but it's still a recognisable turn of events when shown.
The lengths the guy would go to is shown in detail too. Including removing certain body parts to get what he wants.

The film is also incredibly funny at times, especially the dialogue involved and the delivery from the cast.
There are numerous situations when the realistic tones of the film shine even more when the dialogue is laid on in a humorous fashion.
All of it is from Bana too and his naturalistic presence and approach to the role makes it all the more potent.

There are some other scenes of violence throughout though that are occasionally gory. Particularly when Chopper himself gets stabbed that some people may find a little too realistic and almost stomach churning, but it's definitely not a fault, it makes the film more heavy hitting in terms of tone.

Eric Bana in the title role of Chopper absolutely makes this film though. Being the title role, you'd automatically think that. Bana actually spent time with the twitchy and unstable Mark Read in real life on Mark's farm in the Outback so he could study Mark and his characteristics...
It really shows too.
Bana is incredibly unnerving, even disturbing to watch at times and you can see something behind his eyes when the character starts getting "itchy" when he finds himself in situations he doesn't like.
As I said above, he hits the nail on the head with the humour too.
Bana also rocks the physical side of the role. Depending on the scene, 1980s or 1990s etc, Bana goes from unassuming criminal to an overweight thug to a beefed up muscleman and it makes the character development even more enjoyable to watch.

Back up comes from Vince Colosimo, Simon Lyndon and Kate Beahan. They all make an impression, even though none of them are onscreen for very long. The film really is all about Mark Read and his adventures.

---

All in all, not much else to say about it. Highly engaging storywise, full of character and characters, great writing and very funny too in between the sombre psychological thrills that come from Bana's immense acting.

Highly recommended.

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)

honeykid

11-09-13, 09:10 AM

As you probably know, it's a firm favourite of mine. Top 20 without any problem and I've loved it since I saw it for the very first time back in 2000. I still think this is Bana's best performance, too. The stabbing scene you mention is an incredible scene with all three actors playing their part in creating the tension and filling the scene with emotion. It's the most powerful scene in the entire film, IMO and completely encapsulates all three characters perfectly.

The Rodent

11-09-13, 11:16 PM

Exactly. That scene was the one (of many) that stood out the most.
It shows the different sides to their personalities. The first scene when Chopper attacks Keith George as well is quite graphic.

It's definitely a gory film when called for, it never shies away from the blood and guts but certainly a strong film story and style wise.

Sexy Celebrity

11-09-13, 11:46 PM

There's someone named Keith in Chopper?

The Rodent

11-09-13, 11:47 PM

That one is just coincidence.

Sexy Celebrity

11-09-13, 11:48 PM

Ohhhhh... I don't think it is, buddy. It's another synchronicity.

The Rodent

11-09-13, 11:49 PM

If you're going to do that, then Mark Chopper Read is one too... I have a Brother called Mark.

Then there's our MoFo member Mark F... the word Funny begins with F and Chopper is a Funny film. Film also begins with F.

Cue spooky music.

Sexy Celebrity

11-09-13, 11:50 PM

Don't make fun of this. In your synchronicity thread, in your first post, you mentioned Chopper and your friend Keith. And there's a Keith in it.

The Rodent

11-09-13, 11:52 PM

It's a minor character that's seen for literally 15 seconds at the start of the film.

Keithy George... I have a friend called George too.

The Rodent

11-09-13, 11:52 PM

My Mum's middle name is Georgina as well.

Weird.

Sexy Celebrity

11-09-13, 11:53 PM

You stop. You spoke about a lot of stupid synchronicities in your synchronicity thread and now you're gonna be rude to me over this? What is it? Is it the Young Guns joke I made earlier? Get over it.

The Rodent

11-10-13, 12:01 AM

No I'm saying there are Synchronicities and Coincidences.

Two completely different things.

I mean, it's nearly Christmas and I've been making funny Yoda pictures. Our MoFo leader Yoda, is called Chris.

Cue spooky music again.

Sexy Celebrity

11-10-13, 12:01 AM

Ohhhhhh, I know what's going on. I get it now.

You're drinking.

The Rodent

11-10-13, 12:03 AM

Haven't touched alcohol in two weeks.

Sexy Celebrity

11-10-13, 12:03 AM

Well, that's good, then.

Sexy Celebrity

11-10-13, 12:04 AM

Wanna do a commentary?

The Rodent

11-10-13, 12:06 AM

It's 4am here. Might end up asleep soon.

Sexy Celebrity

11-10-13, 12:07 AM

Hey -- you forgot about MoFo Post Count Update for November.

The Rodent

11-10-13, 12:09 AM

Oh crap...

It'll have to be updated in December otherwise the numbers will be off.

I'll do a two monther in December...

cinemaafficionado

11-18-13, 02:40 AM

Review #204, Movie #274

Chopper

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

Year Of Release
2000

Director
Andrew Dominik

Producer
Michele Bennett

Writer
Mark Chopper Read, Andrew Dominik

Cast
Eric Bana, Vince Colosimo, Simon Lyndon, Kate Beahan, David Field

Notes
Eric Bana's debut film propelled him to stardom. But the film had a few setbacks.
One was during the prison scenes as the prison itself was going to be shut down during negotiations between the filmmakers and the prison itself. As a result, the funding was pulled and held back the start date for shooting. We almost didn't get Bana's career making breakthrough.

Also, the film's stylised visuals were purposely made in such a way that the sterile prison seen in the first half, and the overly colourful second half of the film, would give stark contrasts to one another and added an incredible sense of paranoia and chaos, or sterile correctional facility order, in the audience's head depending on the scene.

---

Australian criminal Mark Brandon Read, aka Chopper, flitting between petty theft and minor assault, to kidnap, violent robbery and even murder, Mark makes a name for himself over time in the 1980s and 1990s... eventually making enemies everywhere he goes by beating, torturing, robbing and murdering drug dealers, gang members and junkies...

... and becoming one of the most wanted men in Australian history, both by the law and from warring factions of gangs and petty criminals to even his friends that he's crossed.

---

An incredibly unsettling turn of acting from Eric Bana brings to life what appears on the surface as a far out and occasionally excessive brutal story of crime and punishment.

Look a little deeper though, Chopper is a relatively complex nest of boxes that is easy to follow and never fails to impress no matter how many times you see it.
One thing the film manages to do is cross fantasy with reality very successfully.

Labelled as a Biopic, the film is more of a Biography crossed with some hokum and make-believe that gives the impression that the input from Chopper Read himself played a part in the production.
It also adds weight to Chopper's character too. Throughout the film he flits from lying through his teeth and making up fantastic stories, to telling the truth no matter how bizarre it may sound and the overall playfulness with the script adds a brilliant depth to the story and Chopper's overall character.

The way the character is unravelled is also well written, and his rise to fame is shown in small detail, but it's still a recognisable turn of events when shown.
The lengths the guy would go to is shown in detail too. Including removing certain body parts to get what he wants.

The film is also incredibly funny at times, especially the dialogue involved and the delivery from the cast.
There are numerous situations when the realistic tones of the film shine even more when the dialogue is laid on in a humorous fashion.
All of it is from Bana too and his naturalistic presence and approach to the role makes it all the more potent.

There are some other scenes of violence throughout though that are occasionally gory. Particularly when Chopper himself gets stabbed that some people may find a little too realistic and almost stomach churning, but it's definitely not a fault, it makes the film more heavy hitting in terms of tone.

Eric Bana in the title role of Chopper absolutely makes this film though. Being the title role, you'd automatically think that. Bana actually spent time with the twitchy and unstable Mark Read in real life on Mark's farm in the Outback so he could study Mark and his characteristics...
It really shows too.
Bana is incredibly unnerving, even disturbing to watch at times and you can see something behind his eyes when the character starts getting "itchy" when he finds himself in situations he doesn't like.
As I said above, he hits the nail on the head with the humour too.
Bana also rocks the physical side of the role. Depending on the scene, 1980s or 1990s etc, Bana goes from unassuming criminal to an overweight thug to a beefed up muscleman and it makes the character development even more enjoyable to watch.

Back up comes from Vince Colosimo, Simon Lyndon and Kate Beahan. They all make an impression, even though none of them are onscreen for very long. The film really is all about Mark Read and his adventures.

---

All in all, not much else to say about it. Highly engaging storywise, full of character and characters, great writing and very funny too in between the sombre psychological thrills that come from Bana's immense acting.

Highly recommended.

My Rating: 93%

http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/RodentStampRecommended_zpsa8d317cf.jpg (http://s1163.photobucket.com/user/The-Rodent/media/RodentStampRecommended_zpsa8d317cf.jpg.html)

This movie is also one of my favorites, perhaps because I can relate to some traits of the main character. This biopic is a combo documentary style, which makes it somewhat unique.
Your review is spot on!

The Rodent

11-18-13, 02:44 AM

cinemaafficionado

11-18-13, 02:49 AM

Yeah, it's the fantasy side of the story, most of it from Read and the fact he was a bullsh*t artist that makes the film more interesting.

I couldn't believe how funny it was as well. I was expecting a hardcore violent film but it's laced with subtle humour and stunning visuals.

True that! It's all what makes this movie so enjoyable. I love dramedies but they are so hard to pull off successfully.

cricket

11-18-13, 08:22 AM

Glad to see the love for Chopper; that movie kicks ass.

The Rodent

12-13-13, 10:45 PM

Ok... on a '5' at the mo so may as well make it a special one... and use my new stamps too...
Review #205, Movie #275
Pan's Labyrinth
El Laberinto Del Fauno

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/67/Pan%27s_Labyrinth.jpg

Year Of Release
2006

Director
Guillermo Del Toro

Producer
Guillermo Del Toro, Alfonso Cuaron, Bertha Navarro, Frida Torresblanco, Alvaro Augustin

Writer
Guillermo Del Toro

Cast
Ivana Baquero, Sergi Lopez, Maribel Verdu, Ariadna Gil, Alex Angulo and Doug Jones with Pablo Adan as Narrator

Notes
Del Toro was inspired my many fairy tales for Pan's Labyrinth... he has even been quoted as saying this was "his Narnia", and with good reason too; Del Toro actually turned down the opportunity to direct The Lion, The Witch And The Wardrobe to make Pan's Labyrinth and the result is something far more special than the butchery that was TLTWATW.
Most of the ideas, creatures and visuals in the film were also comprised from simple doodles Del Toro had made on scraps of paper... to add to that, CGI used to make his vision come to life was incorporated into the film sparingly too, and most of the effects and wonderful visuals were actually immensely complex sets, animatronics and makeup design.

---
Ofelia, a little girl living in the aftermath of the Spanish Civil War (and with the rest of the world enthralled in WWII), has been moved with her heavily pregnant Mother to live with her Mother's new husband the Falangist Captain Vidal.
Vidal is a particularly brutal man with little remorse or emotion (other than anger) who is hunting the remnants of the Spanish Maquis and Ofelia and her Mother, along with their Maid/Helper live in constant fear of doing the wrong thing by Vidal.
But being an adventurous girl, Ofelia wanders into the nearby woodland and discovers a Faun...

... and the Faun tells Ofelia that she is the reincarnation of a Princess called Moanna... and she must accomplish a number of tasks so that she can re-join her people in a magical land and rule with her long dead Father.
---
Simply.
Breath-taking.

Del Toro's creation is an absolute marvel to watch. He's incorporated some of the most special pieces of almost every Fairy Tale going and updated to whole lot into what I can only describe as a modern classic.

The very essence of Labyrinth is a real treat for anyone who has grown up with fantasy films. The filmmakers have made a genuinely hard hitting, heart-wrenchingly touching, heart-poundingly exciting and visually stunning movie for adults that delivers on every front.

What makes the movie stand apart is the sheer detail that Del Toro has put into the film. The look of the world, whether it be at the small town that Ofelia and her family are occupying, the wooded area she frequents or even the more fantastical places she visits on the adventures the Faun sends her; the eye for detail is simply immense.

Not just highly realised when it comes to originality, it's also highly recognisable in the fact that a lot of it is based around Fairy Tales and Fantasy of old and it gives a much more believable edge over other Fantasy features.

The story too is incredibly simple. Yet, so simple it gives yet more of an edge over other films of this type.
Little girl, reincarnated Princess, has to do tasks. That's it.
But then they overlay all of this with Ofelia's family and friends and then create a genuinely frightening antagonist in her Step-Father and back that up with the backdrop of a war.

What you're watching here is 3 films intertwined and written so brilliantly that it's easy to follow... and enjoy the whole lot at the same time.
Another thing that's special is that the audience never knows whether Ophelia's adventures really happened or if they're just her imagination. It's very cleverly put together in the screenplay.

The acting is also incredible.
Ivana Baquero as Ofelia is wonderfully out of her depth in the circumstances. Whether in the presence of her Step-Father, witnessing the war or in the middle of her adventures, she has an brilliant innocence about her that just draws the viewer in to loving her portrayal of the character and her strengths too.

Sergi Lopez is also on top form as Captain Vidal. His quiet unassuming persona makes for a genuinely disturbing character and when the going gets tough, his meaner side really shows through nicely.

Maribel Verdu as the Maid, Ariadna Gil as Ofelia's pregnant Mother and Alex Angulo as Doctor Ferreiro are more side characters but they have their own part to play within the "real world setting" amongst the war and fear of Captain Vidal.

The standout role though comes from Doug Jones in two roles... as the Faun, and also as the evil Pale Man.
Jones is barely seen under his makeup and prosthetics but his acting and, what is basically a mime act in both roles, are possibly the finest pieces of physical acting I've yet to see in a film.

There's little to no action exactly. More based around the puppetry and occasional CG that backs up the events around Ofelia.
But the sheer atmosphere of every set and set piece makes for highly entertaining viewing.
When the little hits of "action" do occur though, they're well pieced together in choreography and style and add more to the story as they're there for a reason, rather than just action for the sake of it.
The film is really more about story, atmosphere and character than just explosions and war.
One thing I will say though, is that the film doesn't shy away from gore and guts. Always a good thing especially when used to enhance the scene.

---

All in all, a modern classic and I can almost guarantee will reach ranks of actual Classic not far from now.

Incredible storytelling, visually beautiful and "engaging" just doesn't sum up the character writing at all.

One of the best I've seen.

My rating: 101%

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

12-13-13, 10:49 PM

For some reason all of the spaces between my paragraphs won't appear. The forum keeps bunching the writing together.,

Mmmm Donuts

12-13-13, 10:55 PM

Pan's Labyrinth, a hauntingly beautiful and fantastic movie. Completely agree with this review. Nice job Rodent!

:up::up::up::up::up:

Sexy Celebrity

12-13-13, 10:55 PM

http://www.movieforums.com/community/attachment.php?attachmentid=12010&stc=1&d=1386989702

The Rodent

12-13-13, 10:59 PM

AHAHA!!! Managed to fix the problem... should be easier to read now :)

Cheers guys! Took me a while to appreciate the film but it's awesome stuff.

Sexy Celebrity

12-13-13, 11:09 PM

I thought it was great when I saw at the movies. That was back in 2006, though, I guess.

The Rodent

12-13-13, 11:10 PM

Sexy Celebrity

12-14-13, 02:16 AM

http://i.imgur.com/v9HM1Oq.gifhttp://i.imgur.com/v9HM1Oq.gif
http://i.imgur.com/v9HM1Oq.gifhttp://i.imgur.com/v9HM1Oq.gif
http://i.imgur.com/v9HM1Oq.gifhttp://i.imgur.com/v9HM1Oq.gif
http://i.imgur.com/v9HM1Oq.gifhttp://i.imgur.com/v9HM1Oq.gif

JayDee

12-14-13, 01:58 PM

The first time I watched it I couldn't get into it...

I gave it a second chance though about two weeks ago and fell in love. It's just an excellent piece of filmmaking all round, can't believe I didn't watch all the way through first time.

I'm kind of in the opposite boat. When I originally watched it at the cinema I absolutely loved it. However when I revisited it earlier this year for my new top 100 list (which now has an ETA of April 2016!) I still thought it was an incredible piece of filmmaking but struggled to form the same connection as previously. Hopefully I just didn't catch it in the right mood, and when I rewatch it (which I will fairly soon) it goes back to hitting the high notes it did originally.

Sexy Celebrity

12-14-13, 02:48 PM

http://i.imgur.com/XSA8P6P.gif
http://i.imgur.com/5r3bDLL.gif

nebbit

12-16-13, 01:41 AM

[CENTER]Review #204, Movie #274
Chopper

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

Year Of Release
2000

Director
Andrew Dominik

Producer
Michele Bennett

Writer
Mark Chopper Read, Andrew Dominik

Cast
Eric Bana, Vince Colosimo, Simon Lyndon, Kate Beahan, David Field

Notes
Eric Bana's debut film propelled him to stardom.

Highly recommended.

My Rating: 93%

I was a fan of his long before this movie, he had his own show here in Australia :yup:
Nice review, He was fab in this movie :yup:

the samoan lawyer

12-16-13, 05:38 AM

Great reviews Rodent!!

The Rodent

12-23-13, 07:53 AM

My first Uwe Boll review...
Review #206, Movie #276
House Of The Dead

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/80/Houseofthedeadposter.jpg

Year Of Release
2003

Director
Uwe Boll
Producer
Uwe Boll, Wolfgang Herold, Shawn Williamson

Writer
Mark A Altman, Dan Bates

Cast
Jonathan Cherry, Ona Grauer, Enuka Okuma, Tyrone Leitso, Will Sanderson, Clint Howard, Jürgen Prochnow, Ellie Cornell, Michael Ecklund

Notes
Based on the SEGA videogame of the same name, House Of The Dead shares little resemblance to the arcade blockbuster except for two characters who are played by actors that actually appear near the bottom end of the casting credits.
It also managed to reach the Top 100 of the worst films of the 2000s on Rotten Tomatoes.
The film is also billed as an action comedy horror yet contains no comedy, and no horror.
There was a Director's Cut of the film released as well that was marketed as "The Funny Version" yet this too was met with distain from audiences and critics. This version had bloopers, mistakes and outtakes that would normally be found in DVD Extras, but were actually re-edited back into the film.

---
Seet just before the original game, a bunch of 20-somethings head out to an Island for a rave party with another larger group of 20-somethings... much to the disapproving eye of a local boat Captain called Kirk (yes, really).
While there they realise that the stories told by the Captain and his First Mate were true...
... that the island is inhabited by an inhuman population and the group are thrown into a fight for survival.
Lol!

Ok...

Uwe Boll... one of the worst directors in living memory brings us a wooden cast, a clunky story, a pathetic screenplay and what has to be the most non-scary horror I have ever witnessed next to Alien Vs Predator and A Nightmare On Elm Street Remake.
This film however takes the honours of being possibly the worst of the worst within the genre it's based in.

What we're treated to at the start of the film is a 2 minute voiceover/narrative that actually tells us the destinies of the young adults we're looking at on screen.
So that's the tension and exposition done with before the credits have even run.

Then we're taken on a journey with this group that is filled with gratuitous nudity and explanatory dialogue scenes involving video footage shot by one of the group.
There's also constant music going on... the kind you would find in a TV Movie.

The dialogue is also incredibly cringe worthy... imagine the scene inside the house on the island... the group are watching the camera footage and our man is unemotionally explaining:
"Everyone was partying and these things came and they attacked the rave and started killing everybody. Those of us that could get away, did. These things just kept coming though, and killing and killing and killing... then you guys showed up and I thought you were more of them"
"Them? Who the hell is Them?"
"Who? What you should be asking is What"
Award winning writing right there.
Which is about as far as it gets with the more highly strung scenes really. Everything else is, quite literally, people running and screaming directly at the camera as they get killed to death by some bloke wearing bad makeup and prosthetics.

It's also not even funny. The film was labelled as unintentionally funny in some online reviews. Sadly though, I failed to even see this during the running time. There are no laughs. At all. Unintentional or not.

Which brings me to the acting.
I've never heard of a single person in this film. Not one.
So it's kinda hard to pick one out to talk about but rest assured, everyone on board is wooden, emotionless (apart from screaming) and seem to be having a hard time delivering their lines for some reason.
It's as though they've been given the script for that scene just as they've walked on the set that afternoon.

The effects too are below substandard. Fake axes that look like fake axes, zero charisma within the action scenes and the more bloody scenes look like they've had matt-finish paint thrown on them.
The choreography is also below substandard. I had absolutely no thrill watching.

---

Not much more I can say really.

All in all... definitely one of the worst films I've ever seen.

I've seen a couple of his films in the past but Uwe Boll has managed to exceed my expectations with this one.

Also, at least Paul WS Anderson managed to get some percentage points out of me for the films of his I've reviewed.

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)

mark f

12-23-13, 12:23 PM

C'mon! You know you've seen Clint Howard in all of his brother Ron's movies, and Jürgen Prochnow in lots, including Das Boot, Dune, etc. I like that you call the effects and the choreography sub-substandard. I guess I'll have to check this out because if it's that bad, it must be great! :D

http://analogmedium.com/blog/2007/04/house%2Bof%2Bthe%2Bdead%2B2.jpg
Clint in the middle and Jürgen on the right

The Rodent

12-23-13, 12:27 PM

Why is Clint Howard in such a pile?

Surely he could have hung off his Brother's coattails and got a better pay check.

Not seen Dune or Das Boot for aaaages though, I just can't remember Prochnow.

But yeah, the whole film is sub-sub-substandard... seriously pathetic film.

Sexy Celebrity

12-23-13, 04:25 PM

I haven't seen it, but 0% is a little overboard.

The Rodent

12-23-13, 04:26 PM

Trust me.

0% for Superman 4.
0% for Alien Hunter.

And now 0% for House Of The Dead.

The Rodent

01-11-14, 12:17 AM

Review #207, Movie #277 and #278

Kick-Ass Duo

Kick-Ass

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/30/Kick-Ass_film_poster.jpg

Year Of Release

2010

Director

Matthew Vaughan

Producer

Adam Bohling, Tarquin Pack, Brad Pitt, David Reid

Writer

Mark Millar, John Romita Jr, Jane Goldman, Matthew Vaughan

Cast

Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Chloë Grace Moretz, Nicolas Cage, Mark Strong, Christopher Mintz-Plasse and Morris Chestnut

---

New York teenager Dave is a regular kid. He hangs out with friends, loves his comic books and wonders why nobody has ever actually donned a suit and done it for real.
Until the day he buys himself what resembles a wetsuit and some batons off the internet and heads out into the city.

After some teething problems and an incident that leaves him with damaged nerve-endings meaning his pain threshold is higher than most other people… Dave finds himself drawn back onto the streets and ends up defending a man who is being beaten by a gang of thugs.

Dave then labels himself as “Kick-Ass” to a by passer with a cell-phone who recorded the whole thing…

… and Kick-Ass becomes an immediate internet sensation.

But his new found fame draws the attention of a pretty disturbing Father-Daughter team who have been planning their own little superhero adventure with their own motives… and together, the three head out into the city and make enemies with a rather dangerous Crime-Lord.

---

Absolutely brilliant.
Based on the comic of the same name, Kick-Ass gives all the thrills and spills of a genuine comic book movie and manages to throw in some real world blood and guts, bad language and some border-ultraviolent action crossed with some more fantastical action too.

For a start, there are some genuine laughs to be had throughout the running time. It’s all reality based too and keeps within a situational humour most of the time.

The second thing that makes an impact is the huge connection the audience gets to the characters. They’re all extremely well fleshed out and well written.
The other thing is the likeability, or un-likeability, of the characters… the overall writing is spot on and makes for some memorable roles and even the bad guys have you laughing from time to time.

What really makes the biggest mark though, for me, is the screenplay and scripting. The sequence of events is pretty polished and believable and draws the audience into the story.
Some of the dialogue is also really funny, especially when Hit Girl appears.

One thing missing though, is that the film never really has any defining moment. No moment of realisation as such. It tends to rely more on plot devices that push the screenplay along… but one thing, the exposition is spot on which makes all the smaller moments work well.

The acting is also bang on.
Aaron Taylor-Johnson is the perfect choice for Kick-Ass. His naïve and out-of-his-depth persona works wonderfully for the weedy geek in a suit. As the story progresses though and Kick-Ass comes out of his shell, ATJ really nails the role and actually seems to grow with the plot.

Mark Strong also makes an impression as head baddie Frank D’Amico. He’s pretty close to the role he played in Robin Hood just with a bit extra comedy thrown in, but the dry bad guy role works brilliantly.

Christopher Mintz-Plasse as the nerdy and slightly unhinged Chris D’Amico (aka; Red Mist), Frank’s son, also makes a decent show. He’s more of a backup role to start that ends up play a huge part in getting Kick-Ass into trouble and simply wants to be like his crime lord Father.

Standout roles though… Nicolas Cage and Chloë Grace Moretz as Father-Daughter team Big Daddy and Hit Girl.
Cage’s take on the slightly nerdy yet incredibly tough ex-Cop with a motive is most definitely my favourite role of Cage’s. He also portrays a sense of disturbing psychopathy too.
Moretz though, of the two, makes the biggest impression. What we’re talking here is a 5ft tall, 7 stone powerhouse who swears like a builder, smashes heads together like a seasoned wrestler and spins around the bad guys like Yoda in the Prequel Trilogy. Her more sombre and quieter scenes, and especially the occasional emotional scenes, are held brilliantly by Moretz.

Backup comes from Morris Chestnut, Clark Duke, Evan Peters, Michael Rispoli, Lyndsy Fonesca and Yancy Butler.

Now, the action and effects.
Fast, brutal, bloody, occasionally funny and definitely what the film revels in when they get going.
The choreography is top drawer too. Along with the fantastical side of the action toward the end of the film, there’s a pretty realistic build up during the running time. It basically starts out in reality before going more into the comic book style.

The soundtrack throughout backs up every scene, whether action or more quieter settings, perfectly too.

---

All in all, Kick-Ass almost redefines the Comic Book Movie Genre with its sheer content and style. In a similar way to maybe Dredd that was released two years later. Kick-Ass is much more colourful in looks though and will appeal to a wider audience.

Tons of fun with a decent build-up style script and lashings of highly stylised and exciting ultraviolence.

A damned good Superhero movie.

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)

---

Kick-Ass 2

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/44/Kick-Ass_2_International_Poster.jpg

Year Of Release

2013

Director

Jeff Wadlow

Producer

Adam Bohling, Tarquin Pack, Matthew Vaughan, Brad Pitt, David Reid

Writer

Mark Millar, John Romita Jr, Matthew Vaughan

Cast

Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Chloë Grace Moretz, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Jim Carrey, Donald Faison, Morris Chestnut and John Leguizamo

---

Years after the first film, Dave has given up crime fighting and has grown bored with his humdrum life. His love life has suffered as well.
Mindy (Hit Girl) however, is still sneaking out at night and skiving school so she can bash heads together in the name of Justice.

Dave decides to make a change and talks to Mindy about training and getting back into the business… and Mindy takes him up on the offer and trains him extensively.
But when Mindy’s adopted Father figure Detective Marcus Williams tells Mindy that she must give up the Cape, Mindy reluctantly agrees, leaving Dave alone on the streets.

But more adventure is around the corner when Chris D’Amico (Red Mist in the first film) has now reinvented himself as the ultimate bad guy, known as The Motherf*cker… and incredibly wealthy villain who simply pays the worst of the worst to do his dirty work for him, and D’Amico has but one mission; to kill Kick-Ass, or, destroy everything Kick-Ass loves.

But Kick-Ass has backup coming in the form of a vigilante group headed by Colonel Stars And Stripes…

“When the cops can no longer Protect And Serve,
Be warned, Mugger, heads up, Perv,
We got the strength, we got the nerve,
To give those in need, what they deserve!
Justice Forever!”

---

Just like real time, the films have 3 years between them and the story has progressed with it too.
The audience is treated to a slightly expanded story when it comes to the lives of the characters and manages to add some more realistic touches to the proceedings that were seen in the first film.
Especially when it comes to Chris D’Amico.
This film shows his progression from frustrated and angry kid to a genuinely twisted and almost perverted spoiled brat with an agenda. Definitely a good move for this film, it makes for a more personal battle between him and Kick-Ass as we see D’Amico’s well written development.

We’re also treated to Hit Girl and her character expansion from what is essentially a lost, confused and damaged young girl into a strong woman who has to find her place in the world.

Gradually though, like with the original, the filmmakers make things get bigger as the movie goes on and eventually we get a well pieced together progressive story around the characters we all met and learned about in the first film.

There’s also the same recognisable humour that was seen in the first film laced throughout this one too.

The acting again is bang on.
Aaron Taylor-Johnson is improved as Dave/Kick-Ass. His slightly expanded character is a nice touch but ATJ hasn’t changed our Hero so much that he becomes something too different. There is an incident toward the end that makes for a new twist on the character development and it adds a new depth to our green/yellow Hero.
ATJ has also beefed up substantially for the role, and his fight scenes are a hell of a lot better. Aaron really put the work in.

Christopher Mintz-Plasse is much better this time round. You get the impression he’s been given more free reign with the script too and the longer screen time is good to see.

Moretz returns as Mindy/Hit Girl and she’s definitely the most improved of the 3 main returning cast members in both writing and acting. Her role has been given more of an arc too and it makes her character even more likeable. Moretz alos nails the role.

Additions are our Superteam Justice Forever… Donald Faison as Doctor Gravity (funny role), Lindy Booth as Night-Bitch, Robert Emms as Insect Man and…

… Jim Carrey is completely unrecognisable as Colonel Stars And Stripes.
Carrey absolutely makes this film when he’s on screen. It’s just a shame that he’s not on screen for the entire running time. He’s absolutely brilliant and definitely the best of the background actors.

Backup comes from Morris Chestnut again, with John Leguizamo, Olga Kurkulina (brilliant role) and a cameo from Iain Glen.
Glen in particular I can see making a showing if they ever make Kick-Ass 3. His cameo is memorable.

The action this time round is about the same as the first… starting relatively small and then getting larger…

We’re treated to some great choreography again though and a lot of the action and fighting has the story to back it up this time too.
It’s definitely more personal in this film.

Again though, the soundtrack backs it all up brilliantly.

---

All in all, improved in the storytelling and character development and actually has a few of those realisation moments that were lacking from the original. Better writing throughout and keeping with the tone and style of the first film which makes it feel, well, connected.

It is lacking any sort of larger scale action which should be seen in a sequel though.

Still a great Superhero movie though.

My rating: Same as the first, 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)

The Rodent

01-11-14, 12:37 AM

Update... been a while since the last...

PAGE 1

1 - Young Guns 90%
2 - A Nightmare On Elm Street (2010 Remake) 2%
3 – 2012 15%
4 - Cowboys And Aliens 85%
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%

PAGE 35

200 – Judgment Night 93% [200th Review, 270th Movie]

PAGE 36

201 - Close Encounters Of The Third Kind 101%

PAGE 37

202 - The Bone Collector 68%

PAGE 38

203 - The Star Trek Franchise - 2 Part Rodent’s Revisited and Star Trek Into Darkness 97%

PAGE 39

204 - Chopper 93% [274]

PAGE 40

205 - Pan’s Labyrinth 101%
206 - House Of The Dead 0%

PAGE 41

207 - Kick-Ass Duo 92% & 92%

nebbit

01-12-14, 07:36 AM

Wow, great work Mouse http://www.smileys4msn.com/displaysmiley.php?show=165

The Rodent

02-02-14, 09:33 AM

Review #208, Movie #279

One Hour Photo

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/2/2d/One_Hour_Photo_movie.jpg

Year Of Release

2002

Director

Mark Romanek

Producer

Christine Vachon

Writer

Mark Romanek

Cast

Robin Williams, Connie Nielsen, Michael Vartan, Dylan Smith and Eriq La Salle

Notes
Many of the characters in the film are named after real life photographers, including the hotel seen at the end of the film, The Edgerton, named after Harold Eugene Edgerton.

Many "Lonely Man" films, including Taxi Driver, were an inspiration for One Hour Photo.

Robin Williams' natural upbeat manner and zany antics are an absolute no-show in his character Sy... Williams would actually go nuts when the cameras stopped rolling so he could let out his pent-up antics.

---

Sy, the "Photo Guy"... is an ordinary, if slightly awkward man who has spent the past 20 years of his life working in SavMart's photo lab. Every day people bring in their films for processing.

Sy takes great care with people's photos, even treating them as if they were his own to get the best results within the One Hour Processing that his kiosk offers.

But Sy has a secret... Sy The Photo Guy is more disturbed than anyone could imagine.

---

This underrated thriller brings a depth of story and a lead character so memorable, it's hard to deny Robin Williams' brilliance.

For a start, it's very simple... nice guy with a darker side, takes a fancy to other people's lives.
The screenplay is also pretty simple yet the storytelling is so well put together, you actually get to care for Sy and for the other people in the story that he inevitably has dealings with.

What's good about the film, is that there is a very subtly undertone of psychology.
What made Sy this way? Is he simply lonely? Or has 20 years of being alone with nothing other than other people's photos as company twisted his sense of right and wrong?

And... was he actually in the right after all, with what he does?

It's a very thought provoking story.

The acting is also bang on.
Michael Vartan and Connie Nielsen as married couple Will and Nina are pretty apt... they play the long term married couple with problems really well.
As too does Dylan Smith, the son of Nina and Will. His natural innocence, especially when it comes to Sy is lovely to see in a film of this type.

Robin Williams however... wow.
Excessively normal. Extremely quiet and subdued but when the screenplay comes into it's own and Sy is... unleashed... Robin Williams becomes something immensely upsetting.
Combining that with the fact that Williams himself was holding back his own flashy side, it makes his acting even more potent.
There are some scenes early on that show Sy's darker side, but Williams' natural screen presence to be likeable, it makes for an incredibly in-depth character.
Williams also studied photography and photo development to make the role more believable.

Back up comes from Eriq La Salle as a Detective and Gary Cole as Sy's manager.

There's little to no action really. Apart from some pretty highly emotionally charged scenes but the, erm, photography is absolutely tip top and some of the more quieter scenes mixed with a relatively haunting soundtrack make for some engaging cinema.

---

All in all, not perfect... but simple and small enough to keep your eyes fixed to the screen without getting bored.

Quite disturbing in some scenes when you see the lead character's darker side set against his lighter side.

And Robin Williams absolutely makes this film and rocks the world of cinema with his turn as the twisted Photo Guy.

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)

Sexy Celebrity

02-02-14, 09:41 AM

I saw that in a theater when it came out and used to own it on DVD. Liked it back then, but haven't seen it in a long time.

The Rodent

02-02-14, 09:45 AM

Underrated film. Robin Williams shocked me when I first saw it.

JayDee

02-07-14, 08:35 PM

I agree that One Hour Photo was a pretty great film. I've only actually seen it once, and it must be more than 10 years ago now. Despite that however there are a number of scenes and moments which still stick in my mind; obviously a sign that it made quite the impact. And Williams I thought was excellent. It's that thing of having comedy actors play against type that when it works, it can be extraordinary. The likes of Bill Murray and Jim Carrey being prime examples. And that performance from Williams is certainly one of the most effective.

Also nice job with the Kick-Ass reviews. Or review actually. I only read the first one in case there happened to be any spoilers for the sequel. Big fan of the first film and looking forward to catching the sequel sometime soon.

The Rodent

02-07-14, 10:32 PM

Nah, there's no spoilers in my review bud... it's safe to read Kick Ass 2.

The Rodent

02-20-14, 03:17 AM

Review #209, Movie #280

Lawless

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a0/Lawless_film_poster.jpg

Year Of Release

2012

Director

John Hillcoat

Producer

Lucy Fisher, Douglas Wick, Megan Ellison, Michael Benaroya

Writer

Nick Cave, Matt Bondurant

Cast

Shia LaBeouf, Tom Hardy, Jason Clarke, Jessica Chastain, Guy Pearce, Dane DeHaan, Mia Wasikowska and Gary Oldman

Notes

Based upon the novel, and true story, written by Matt Bondurant, the movie itself is pretty brutal at times yet filmmakers actually cut back a lot of the brutal things that happened in real life and kept only a handful of occurrences in the finished cut.

The filmmakers also always used two cameras for every scene. This gave a freedom in the editing room to make each scene as perfect as possible and capture all of the actors’ emotions.

The original cast for the Bondurant Brothers was also going to be Shia LaBeouf, James Franco and Ryan Gosling… after a number of cast members dropped out though, putting the project on hold… in a chance meeting though, Director Hillcoat watched Bronson (2008) and was compelled to write a letter to Tom Hardy explaining his admiration.

Hardy and Hillcoat then swapped a couple of scripts between them for different projects, one of them was the script for Lawless (known as The Promised Land at the time), which Hardy immediately fell in love with.

The rest is (ahem) history.

---

The Bondurant Brothers, 3 completely different men.

The eldest, Howard (Clarke), is a bit of a loose cannon and doesn't hesitate in getting involved in a fight, even if it's with the local law.

The middle Brother, Forrest (Hardy), is more even tempered, highly intelligent and just as lethal in a brawl as his older Brother. Forrest leads the family.

The youngest, Jack (LaBeouf), is smaller, weaker, more afraid... but still looks up to his Brothers and wants to be like them.
Jack wants to be a Moonshiner... a Franklin County Bootlegger.

The Brothers however will be thrown into a battle of wits, fistfights and bullets... and all three of them will have their disparate personalities tested when a new Lawman arrives from Chicago... who appears to be more twisted and perverted than anyone could imagine.

---

Awesome.

Brutality, blood soaked fights and hard edged action backed up by rousing performances from all involved and backed up with some incredible feel-good cinema and giggles to boot(leg)... :facepalm: sorry, couldn't resist.

Lawless starts out quiet. It allows for the character development to build gently over the first 25 minutes or so, mixed in with a few fistfights of course, but it allows you to get to know the people involved.

Secondly, from then on in it's all plot. All of it.
And it's all written brilliantly real. Seeing as it was based on a true story, that might seem obvious, but Lawless never ever shies away from reality.
The character traits mixed with the sequence of events and how the sequences play on the mind-sets of the characters adds a huge likability factor to the proceedings.

You get to care about the people involved, and can get to caring how they progress with the story.
The they throw in the slimy antagonist, which again, you get the chance to know him before the filmmakers start getting him to do horrible things which adds more depth to him and makes you hate him more.

The main thing though, is how solid everything in the story is... the writing, acting, screenplay, soundtrack... it's a solid film across the board and draws the viewer into believing everything that's going on.

Which brings me to the acting.

Shia LaBeouf seriously knocked me back with this one. I'm not a fan of his work to be completely honest, but here he's down to earth, full of naïve wonder and excitement and always impresses when the going gets tough. Whether fighting, crying, making funny or wooing his ladyfriend, Shia impresses with every turn.

Backing Shia up is Mia Wasikowska as Bertha Minnix... in real life, Mia was stalked by Shia as part of his role, kinda like a method actor, so it made their connection much more realistic... Mia seems to be genuinely playing with Shia's emotions on screen too. They've very good together and Mia makes for a beautiful love interest.

Jason Clarke isn't seen a massive amount though. It adds a mystery to his character though, I'd have liked to have seen more of the older, more unhinged Brother. Clarke is good when seen though.

Jessica Chastain is awesome too as Forrest's (middle Brother) love interest. She has more to do than just a damsel in distress or some sort of redemption role for Forrest. Chastain also carries the aftermath of a particularly upsetting scene exceptionally well.

Tom Hardy as middle Brother Forrest though, absolutely makes this film. The middle but leader of the Brothers and Hardy's natural talent for having something behind his eyes when he goes quiet, is a masterful stroke for the character. Even though he can be rather disturbing to watch at times, he still makes you want to know him. Exceptional acting across the board. He even wore weights on his legs to give himself an appearance of being an out of shape, old-before-his-time character.

Guy Pearce also makes a huge impact... his slimy, disgusting and violent Lawman with little to no emotion apart from anger and OCD, makes for an exceptional bad guy.
Pearce also, it appears, shaved most of his eyebrows off to give himself even more of an inhuman appearance.
Pearce really makes your toes curl.

Back up comes from Gary Oldman (wanted to see more of him), Dane DeHaan (great role), Noah Taylor and Lew Temple.

The action, though good, is used sparingly.
The trailers give an impression of action, gunfights, almost old west style in tone...

However there's only a few scenes of more highly charged action and gunplay.
There are many scenes with fisticuffs going on, and more than a few scenes of brutal violence...
... but it's all toned back into reality rather than some sort of action heavy bash-em-up like maybe Bruce Willis' Last Man Standing.

The choreography is tip top though, and the fights never shy away from blood, bone and guts, and occasionally there's a scene that really makes you cringe while watching due to the nature of the violence.

Put it this way, the film is 18 rated in Britain, which is one of the reasons I bought it without watching it first... and I wasn't disappointed.

---
All in all... very violent when the violence is used... but the solid script and screenplay backed up by the best acting of its type, Lawless is one for the books.
Exciting, great audience-character connections, some heart touching scenes and some laughs along the way too...
It feels underplayed at times, but being based on a true story gives it the weight needed to make an impression.
A damned good film.
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)

the samoan lawyer

02-20-14, 04:32 AM

Great review(s) Rodent. I really enjoyed Lawless too. :up:

The Rodent

02-20-14, 08:08 AM

Review #210, Movie #281

Prisoners
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/63/Prisoners2013Poster.jpg

Year Of Release

2013

Director

Denis Villeneuve

Producer

Broderick Johnson, Kira Davis, Andrew A Kosove, Adam Kolbrenner

Writer

Aaron Guzikowski

Cast

Hugh Jackman, Jake Gyllenhaal, Paul Dano, Terrence Howard, Viola Davis, Maria Bello, Dylan Minnette, Erin Gerasimovich, Kyla Drew Simmons, David Dastmalchian and Melissa Leo

Notes

The original cast for this film was going to star Marky Marky Mark Mark and Christian Bale, but the two dropped out in favour of The Fighter. Bryan Singer was also going to direct.

Thank God they all dropped out, Marky Mark and Bryan Singer would have ruined this film.

On a similar, mirrored note, Jackman was going to star in The Lovely Bones, a film with a similar story, but was replaced by Marky Marky Mark Mark.

Leonardo Di Caprio was also attached at one point but he too dropped out.

The film itself was also in development for several years with numerous Directors attached… Jackman was attached way back near the start of production, but dropped out, only then to return to the cast sheet again.

---

During Thanksgiving, Keller Dover, his Wife Grace and their children Ralph and Anna, attend the home of their neighbour’s, Franklin and Nancy Birch and their children Eliza and Joy…

Anna is good friends with Joy as they’re relatively the same age.

But during the celebrations, the two families become aware of the fact that Anna and Joy have seemingly vanished without a trace after a strange RV was parked outside…

… and a desperate attempt is launched at finding the two missing girls.

But it won’t be easy when it transpires that the only suspect is a young male with the mind of a child… and the Police, especially the hot tempered but highly intelligent Detective David Loki, who is in charge of the case, find themselves completely powerless in the search for Anna and Joy.

So Keller Dover, Anna’s rage fuelled survival nut Father, takes matters into his own hands to get to the truth.

---

I am so glad I bought this on DVD.
I hadn’t seen it, only heard a few good things about it and took the chance…
Next to my last review of Lawless, this is one of the best films of the 2010s.

Immensely gritty take on the olde kidnapped child plot, Prisoners is a tightly wound nest of boxes that unravels not just the plot and twists along the running time… it unravels characters, character traits, character histories and adds new characters to the mix as it progresses.
Then it throws in some extremely clever plot devices that throw the audience into a state of confusion along with the well acted characters.

Even though there is an incredible amount of detail in every aspect of the film, whether the plot, dialogue, character writing etc, it’s still easy to follow.
The film is a progressive story, an in depth journey of loss and frustration, anger and tears that the audience is swept up in as the film runs along at a comfortable pace.

I’ll get straight to the acting I think… this is what the film really brings to the foreground to make the exceptional writing work so well.

Paul Dano as the mentally handicapped suspect Alex Jones is completely unrecognisable. His take as the disturbed, possibly innocent, possibly guilty, well, weirdo, is perfect for a film of this kind. It throws the audience and keeps the mystery ramped up and Dano carries it extremely well.
We also have Melissa Leo playing Holly Jones, Alex Jones’ Aunt… her role within the film, as with everyone else, is unravelled slowly and her history is revealed perfectly. Leo plays it coolly too.

The Birches are played by Terrence Howard and Viola Davis… they’re not really seen a great deal during the overall running time, but their roles when seen are also used well. They’re stuck in the middle basically. They’re more reliant on searching nearby woods and Police intervention but actually back Keller (Jackman) up when he goes off the rails and even support his cause.
Viola in particular is exceptional in the more emotional scenes.

Hugh Jackman however, we’re treated to a guy whose rage and frustration is seconded only to his sheer will at finding out where his child is.
It’s when Keller is unleashed though that Jackman really comes into his own.The pain you see in the acting is genuinely real.
Jackman absolutely nails this role to the wall.

We’re also treated to Jake Gyllenhaal in possibly the finest acting I’ve ever seen from him.
His Detective that is completely unbending in his task to find Anna and Joy is backed up by what I can only describe as an untold history within the character’s traits and mannerisms… all of this comes through in Jake’s acting.
This is another case of taking a very well written character and tearing up the rule book.

Back up comes from Maria Bello as Grace Dover, who spends most of the film drugged up to the eyeballs, and Dylan Minnette as Ralph Dover.

There’s little actual action as such.
It’s all based around the highly strung scenes between Keller, Loki, The Birches and Alex Jones.

It’s all written perfectly too and the actors involved, as I said, all give 101% to get the audience on the edge of their seat.
Even the more gruesome and heavier scenes, you can’t help but get behind Keller and support him.
There is though, the question of whether he has the right man or not as well that comes from the well developed scripting… going through the journey with the characters the audience is thrown into the mind set of whether Keller’s right or not, and technically, the “action” scenes actually have a massive impact on the mystery aspect of the story.

It’s all very cleverly pieced together.

---

All in all, heavy hitting, full of twists and turns, storylines, characters and plot devices that make the audience question not only what they thought they witnessed in passing glimpses of dialogue and visuals, but makes the viewer even question themself.

The acting is also by far the most intense I’ve seen in a long, long time.

Brilliant filmmaking on all fronts.

My rating: 100%
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)

seanc

02-20-14, 08:53 AM

Two very good reviews of two movies I like but don't love.

Sexy Celebrity

02-20-14, 09:58 AM

Back up comes from Maria Bello as Grace Dover, who spends most of the film drugged up to the eyeballs

:laugh:

At first I thought you were talking about one of the missing little girls, but then I realized that's Hugh Jackman's wife character.

Great review. I thought this was a really good movie.

seanc

02-20-14, 10:13 AM

:laugh:

At first I thought you were talking about one of the missing little girls, but then I realized that's Hugh Jackman's wife character.

Great review. I thought this was a really good movie.
I know your a big Gyllenhall fan Sexy. Have you seen the directv exclusive movie he is in?

Sexy Celebrity

02-20-14, 10:14 AM

I know your a big Gyllenhall fan Sexy. Have you seen the directv exclusive movie he is in?

No... I don't even know of it. What's it called?

seanc

02-20-14, 10:55 AM

No... I don't even know of it. What's it called?
Enemy. Hard to figure out what its about. Directv was much more interested in letting the viewer know it was exclusive.

cricket

02-20-14, 11:03 AM

Great reviews Rodent; I also loved both of these films. Lawless seems to be underrated IMO.

Sexy Celebrity

02-20-14, 11:26 AM

Enemy. Hard to figure out what its about. Directv was much more interested in letting the viewer know it was exclusive.

Oh, I know that movie. I don't have Directv, though.

The Rodent

02-20-14, 11:28 AM

Yeah I just checked online... RT gave Lawless 67%... and only 3.5 stars, 7.3/10 on IMDb.

I think it's an excellent film. Well, that's obvious.

Masterman

02-20-14, 12:50 PM

Great review of Lawless Rodent. Another prime example of why Tom Hardy is one of the best actors around at the moment.

The Rodent

02-20-14, 12:59 PM

I've been gradually becoming a fan of his since seeing Bronson... I saw him in Star Trek Nemesis and he made an impression but Bronson was just a masterpiece of acting.

Then his take as Bane cemented it for me really.

But seeing Warrior and now Lawless, he's certainly in my Top 3 next to Sam Rockwell and Christopher Reeve.

I was thinking just today, how he's never had many leading roles apart from Bronson... and could do with a decent turn...

But then I remembered he's in Mad Max Fury Road... out in 2015. Looking forward to that. Wasn't to start with...

But now imagine the psychopathic Max but with Hardy in the role... should be good...

The Sci-Fi Slob

02-20-14, 01:06 PM

Nice reviews of Lawless and Prisoners. I'm not too keen on Prisoners - It had a dramatic start and ending, everything in between I found a little slow-paced and boring at times, 3 and a half stars from me.

Masterman

02-20-14, 01:10 PM

The Rodent

02-27-14, 02:16 PM

New stamps for the new design... :)

http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png

http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleR5050StampNew_zps36b9d868.png

http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRejectedStampNew_zpsad11e9b5.png

Yoda

02-27-14, 02:18 PM

Those look great. Nice! And what a turnaround.

nebbit

02-27-14, 07:15 PM

Nice badges Mouse :yup:

The Rodent

02-27-14, 07:44 PM

Well, new look to the site... and new stamps for me too...

May as well do a top film to start it all off...

Review #211, Movie #282
Coraline

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/36/Coraline_poster.jpg

Year Of Release

2009

Director

Henry Selick

Producer

Henry Selick, Claire Jennings

Writer

Henry Selick, Neil Gaiman

Cast

Dakota Fanning, Teri Hatcher, Jennifer Saunders, Dawn French, John Hodgman, Ian McShane and Keith David

Notes

Directed by the man behind The Nightmare Before Christmas (yes, Selick directed Nightmare, not Burton), Coraline came about when Selick met Coraline writer Neil Gaiman, just as Gaiman was finishing the book.

It transpired that Gaiman was a fan of Selick’s work on Nightmare, so the two collaborated, albeit with a few changes in the script to make the film longer than the 47 minutes they were originally looking at… and we the audience were treated to this brilliant animated film which went on to being nominated for 21 Awardsincluded in the American Film Institute, the Chicago Film Critics Association, the San Francisco Film Critics Circle, The People’s Choice and the Annie Awards amongst others… eventually winning 10 altogether.

It was also Honoured with special achievement award for Martin Meunier and Brian McLean for their Rapid Prototyping advances.

---

Coraline, an 11 year old girl, has just moved with her parents into a new apartment that was created by segregating an old Mansion. Her neighbours are a little eccentric and Coraline at first has trouble adapting, mainly through boredom.

When she finds a small doorway in the wall that is bricked off, Coraline is a little disappointed that it doesn’t go anywhere… she was hoping for something exciting, interesting, maybe an adventure… but one night, the door opens, and the brick wall behind it is gone…

---

Quite simply… magical.

On first viewing, I was expecting a Tim Burton clone… the look of the film, animation style especially, and I was expecting another The Nightmare Before Christmas.
What I found though was one of the most engaging animated feature films I’ve seen in a long time.

Brilliantly written in the story stakes, Coraline blends what is essentially a fantasy with genuinely creepy (and even scary) visuals and sequences and makes the whole thing exciting at the same time.

Some of the highly charged scenes had me on the edge of my seat, similar in a way to when The Pale Man chases Ophelia in Pan’s Labyrinth.

There’s also the simple yet wonderfully written characters throughout that bring an air of pizazz to the proceedings.
Coraline getting wound up when people get her name wrong, Mr Bobinski the eccentric Russian who talks of “speaking Mice”, Miss April Spink and Miss Miriam Forcible as Coraline’s (also) eccentric neighbours who own several stuffed Dogs.
It’s very original.

The film also combines many subtle levels of brilliance. The music, general soundtrack, visual styles from one scene to the next that change with the tone of the world that Coraline happens to be in at the time (real world or the “other” world), and voiceover work.
It’s very atmospheric when it needs to be.

Talking of voiceover…

We have Dakota Fanning as out titular Coraline… top notch… you can really feel the intuitive nature of the character through Fanning’s voicework and the more exciting scenes are carried well by her voice alone.

Backing up Fanning are Robert Bailey as Wyborn, Coraline’s only real friend… comedy duo Jennifer Saunders and Dawn French as Miss April Spink and Miss Miriam Forcible respectively, Ian McShane as Mr Bobinski, Keith David as The Cat (great character) and teri Hatcher and John Hodgman as Coraline’s “two sets” of parents…

All give massive character to the, erm, characters and bring the wonderfully animated characters to genuine life.

The action and effects (as such), is fantasy based… but we’re treated to some wonderfully realised set pieces and visuals that add massive charisma (for want of a better word) to the more highly charged and exciting scenes.
The use of light and colour is also a huge factor and very subtle changes between the real world and “other” world are utilised perfectly.

It’s when the people in the other world start showing their real side that the film really comes into its own and makes a massive impression. Even some scenes made me feel a little disturbed at times on first viewing.

---

All in all, one of the best animated films I’ve seen. For me, personally, in terms of animated features, it’s up there with Snow White And The Seven Dwarfs, Dumbo, WALL-E and The Incredibles.

Atmospheric, great voiceover and music, edge of the seat when it gets going, laugh-out-loud funny, engaging and even scary at times.

Simply a wonderful film on all fronts.

My Rating: 99%

http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleRecommendedStampNew_zpsebffc047.png

The Rodent

03-08-14, 11:37 PM

Might try these at some point...

http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleStampRecommended_zps862d439f.png

http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleStamp5050_zps959a8057.png

http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleStampRejected_zpsb7eeda94.png

christine

03-19-14, 01:15 PM

Thanks for the Coraline review. I loved that film too :)

mastermetal777

03-21-14, 09:17 PM

Masterman

03-21-14, 09:19 PM

I loved Kick Ass, haven't seen the second yet.

mastermetal777

03-21-14, 09:22 PM

I haven't seen it, but 0% is a little overboard.

I think it's justified. Uwe Boll has a particular talent for sucking the life out of every video game adaptation he makes. Bloodrayne? Horrible. House of the Dead? Atrocious. Far Cry? Laughable. Alone in the Dark? Probably the worst one of the bunch, in my opinion.

Sedai

04-03-14, 07:20 PM

OK mister...where is this Predator review I heard about....

Sexy Celebrity

04-03-14, 07:22 PM

Masterman's Predator review. (http://www.movieforums.com/community/showthread.php?p=1067238#post1067238)

Sedai

04-03-14, 07:23 PM

Avatar tomfoolery!

Swan

04-03-14, 07:36 PM

I made the same mistake.

Yoda

04-03-14, 07:38 PM

It caught me a few times, too, yeah, but I think I've adjusted. Which means they should be switching back any moment now.

The Rodent

04-03-14, 08:02 PM

I do have a Predator review though... Page 2 of this thread... :D

I might use Masterman's avatar for a while... see how that goes...

Masterman

04-04-14, 06:29 AM

It's my Avatar now Rodent :).

Gideon58

04-14-14, 11:11 AM

Really liked your review of Cowboys and Aliens...really made me want to see the movie. You mentioned that you thought someone else should have been cast in Harrison Ford's role. I'm curious as to who you would have cast in the role?

The Rodent

04-14-14, 11:30 AM

Cheers bud!

Tbh, I don't know who could have done it, but I felt Ford was just sort of playing it by the numbers. Not really giving much to the role.

The Rodent

05-01-14, 10:02 PM

Review #212, Movie #283

TRON

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/17/Tron_poster.jpg

Year Of Release

1982

Director

Steven Lisberger

Producer

Donald Kushner

Writer

Steven Lisberger, Bonnie MacBird

Cast

Jeff Bridges, Bruce Boxleitner, David Warner, Cindy Morgan and Bernard Hughes

Notes

Inspired by, of all things, the videogame Pong, writer/director Lisberger envisioned a world that incorporated videogames and real life and he initially made a 30 second animation of the character TRON based on the ideas that were in his head.

Another thing that spurned Lisberger on was that games and films were separated by the cliquey nature of the fans. A modern day equivalent is the difference between Xbox and Playstation users. Lisberger wanted to bridge the gap between the two factions and create something that both could appreciate.

After the short animation Lisberger created was met with praise though, the idea of animating the film was dropped in place of using cutting edge FX and filming techniques for a live action film crossed with computer animation and rotoscoping, eventually leading to Disney getting involved due to their high budgets, and Disney then had input into the script.

In a move that mirrored the story of the film though, Lisberger and his producer and friend Donald Kushner were both given a cold reception by Disney because they weren’t part of Disney’s own closed group, yet the two filmmakers still obviously wanted to have maximum input into the creative side of things, seeing as it was their baby in the first place, rather much like the way the “Master Control Program” in the film reacts to Flynn and TRON.

TRON is a shortened, stylised version, of the word Electronic.

The computer (yes, computer, not computers) used to put the effects together for the backgrounds in the film and some of the other animated effects like the Lightcycle sequences, had only 2MB of RAM and only 330MB of storage. My near-10-year-old phone has more than that!

This lack of computing power caused a catchphrase among the animators: “If in doubt, black it out”… which is why a number of backgrounds are simply black with only slivers of colour around them.

---

Kevin Flynn, a computer games designer and computer genius at ENCOM, has been slighted by a co-worker called Ed Dillinger.
Dillinger stole a number of Flynn’s game programs and passed them off as his own and in the process he got promoted… and then fired Flynn.
Flynn has been working hard to hack into the Master Control Program (MCP) to find his files and bring justice to Dillinger for Plagiarism and Theft. But the MCP is a cunning Artificial Intelligence that is locked into almost every aspect of ENCOM’s database and stops Flynn at every turn. So Flynn makes another move and sneaks into the building to use a computer inside….

… and using cutting edge Laser Transportation Technology developed by ENCOM, the MCP “beams” Flynn directly into a digitized world called The Grid, that is run by the tyrannical MCP and it’s second in command called SARK…

Absolute Classic.

TRON has a number of faults if you compare it by modern day sci-fi… yet for all its faults TRON has one thing that makes it stand out.

Originality.

What the viewer is treated to, is a first of its kind computerized world within a world and it never lets up in original and clever ideas that are incorporated throughout. Anything from glowing energy that programs consume like water, Lightcycles (motorbikes) that are used in death-race style games, or the very idea of having to wear particularly snazzy outfits with memory discs attached that double as weapons.

Then there’s the idea of the world itself. The Grid is basically the Granddaddy of the modern, real life, RPG game and is filled with incredible detail for history.

What makes the whole thing tie together though, is the idea behind the programs within the digital world looking physically like their Creators (Creators are known as “Users” inside The Grid).
It allows Flynn to interact with them without them getting suspicious. It means that the cast seen at the start of the film are utilized within the digital realm and allows the audience to connect with their humour, plight and tragedy and allows the audience to really get behind the characters in their quest.

Which brings me to the acting.
Jeff Bridges as Kevin Flynn (seen at the start as the program he created called “CLU”)… perfect choice.
Jeff has played the sci-fi and fantasy thing a few times, Starman, King Kong… but here as the computer genius with a bit of muscle to back up the brain, he really hits the nail on the head. He makes for a great, yet fallible hero with the difference of actually being a normal guy.

Bruce Boxleitner plays Alan Bradley, and also the titular TRON. A Security Program that teams up with Flynn. TRON is basically a Warrior… the modern equivalent is an Anti-Virus…
Bruce is fantastic in the part. He plays two very different “people” when he’s seen as Alan, then as TRON.

David Warner also makes a great showing as Dillinger and as SARK… he’s basically the same in both roles, but his natural talent for being stony-faced and slimy but also pathetically weak is perfect for the thief/plagiarist and second in command to the MCP.

Back up comes from Cindy Morgan, Bernard Hughes and Dan Shor, all of whom play dual characters.
Cindy Morgan in particular plays a love triangle between Flynn and Alan… and also Flynn and TRON which makes an interesting dynamic.

The effects and action though… wow.
Cut backs as I mentioned with the lack of computing power don’t actually make much of an impact. The film is stylized almost to perfection… a fault maybe is that lack of background visual detail is a problem, but it gives the digital world a great edge over other films through sheer style.
The action also rewrote the rulebook… all I’m saying is Lightcycles.
Exciting choreographically, brilliant when it comes to the fact that you care about the characters who are in peril… fantastically original in terms of the “games” that are played and filled with some iconic, and I don’t say “iconic” very often, but yes, iconic visuals.

There’s also a cracking digitized soundtrack backing it all up that throws you into the world you’re witnessing.

---

All in all, the original, original, and I’ll say it again, an iconic movie that blazed a path for modern sci-fi movies, modern movie effects and also computer gaming.

Great acting, exciting action, funny, tragic at times and filled with brilliant ideas and little snips of tech that was and still is, years ahead of its time.

My rating: 100%

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

05-02-14, 08:05 AM

Nice review Mouse :yup: I :love: this movie :)

The Rodent

05-12-14, 06:55 AM

Review #213, Movie #284

TRON Legacy

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c2/Tron_Legacy_poster.jpg

Year Of Release

2010

Director

Joseph Kosinski

Producer

Sean Bailey, Jeffrey Silver, Steven Lisberger

Writer

Edward Kitsis, Adam Horowitz, Brian Klugman, Lee Sternthal

Cast

Garrett Hedlund, Olivia Wilde, Jeff Bridges, Bruce Boxleitner and Michael Sheen

Notes

Writing duo Kitsis and Horowitz were both huge fans of TRON and decided to take on the sequel when they were approached by Disney, and eventually put something together that allowed new fans to discover the original, old fans to rediscover the original, pays homage to the original and also expands the broadens the world of The Grid and keeps within the realms of computer technology changing in real life since 1982, all at the same time.

The Wizard Of Oz was cited as the inspiration behind the basic plot of Legacy.

Filming only took 67 days.

Disney were a little worried during pre-production about the film failing at the box office due to a younger audience possibly not knowing about the 1982 original… and that younger audiences would foolishly calling Legacy a rip-off of The Matrix.

---

Kevin Flynn was on the brink of combining digital technology with real life, which would have meant the end of disease and even death, and an open the world to endless possibilities in technology and science… but he disappeared without a trace.

Sam Flynn, Kevin’s Son… has been living a life of solitary since his Father disappeared when he was only young, leaving him basically Orphaned.

Sam simply lives on the fortune left by Kevin, and has little interest in ENCOM even though he’s the main shareholder, apart from occasionally hacking the system and costing them money for their corporate greediness.

When Alan Bradley, the creator of the TRON program in the original film, receives a message from Kevin, Alan contacts Sam with the information… so Sam follows it up and ends up at his Father’s old Gaming Store.

But before Sam has any idea what’s actually going on with his Father, he ends up in a world he really doesn’t want to be in… The Grid…

… and a disturbing truth comes to light behind Kevin’s disappearance all those years ago… and Sam must do everything he can to stop a very dangerous and highhanded program and the Army it has built from destroying the freedom of the digital world… and also from destroying everything, digital or not, that it judges as “imperfect”.

Another classic. This time in waiting.

At time of release it made a bit of a splash but seems to have died off since.

The original did the same thing though, eventually becoming a cult film. I can see Legacy doing the same tbh.

Legacy is one very special sequel. It manages to incorporate the exact same cutting edge imagination as the first film, and then builds on it over and over again until what you’re witnessing is yet another original film filled with some impressive ideas and a recognizable series of events to back it up.

What works though, is the foundation of realism the filmmakers have incorporated.

TRON was a product of its time when it comes to technology. It was blocky, colourful and cutting edge at the same time. Legacy has grown the story with real time.
It’s smooth, clear and clinical and has some of the best effects possible.
In real life, tech has changed… in Legacy, tech has also changed.

It’s very clever the way it ties into the original yet manages to be completely different.

The acting is also ramped up. This time, some of the naïve acting with the subject matter of the original has been ironed out.

Garrett Hedlund plays Sam Flynn (Son of Kevin Flynn) and it’s his task to lead the film through its many subtle levels. Hedlund is on top form too. His rebellious youthful side is almost disorienting, I thought he was a lot younger but he’s near 30 years old.

Olivia Wilde is also magnificently beautiful as Quorra.
She plays almost the everyman of the film and carries a toughness and also a brilliant childlike quality that is perfect for the role. I totally fell in love with Wilde because of this role.

Jeff Bridges is back too as Kevin. This time round he’s become old and a bit flabby but he also plays CLU… this CLU is a new version of the one seen in the first film and using CGI, they’ve “younged” Bridges. It’s a highly impressive turn from Jeff to play a younger and older version of a character he hasn’t played for over 30 years.

We’re also treated to Michael Sheen as Castor/Zeus. My word, Sheen steals this film. He’s like a cross between Austin Powers and Jim Carrey as The Riddler and then adds even more flamboyance to the role then ramps the whole thing up into what I can only describe as immense.
It’s simply raw talent from Sheen.

Back up comes from Bruce Boxleitner as Alan in a smaller role than last time, James Frain, Beau Garrett and Daft Punk make a showing too.

Incredible stunt actor and Martial Artist, Anis Cheurfa, plays TRON this time round.

The action is also good. Backed up by fantastic effects and character writing the film manages to keep you glued to the screen and gets you excited.
There are also some brilliantly realized additions and twists to the “games” we all saw in the first film.

Then there’s a revamped backing track by Daft Punk bringing the whole thing together. Containing the same notes and tones of the original but mixed up, twisted and digitized to perfection. I can’t help but get shivers when the music starts at the beginning of the film.

---

All in all… a brilliant follow up to an ancient classic. Not seen a great deal since but I reckon will start making its mark soon and reach the mythical heights of its predecessor.

Great action, exciting, yet again you care about what’s going on and improved across the board in terms of story, acting, effects and general writing. One of the best sequels I’ve seen.

Put it this way, along with TRON… Legacy is now in my Top 10.

My rating: 100%
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

05-14-14, 10:00 AM

Review #214, Movie #285

Starman

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d9/Starman_film_poster.jpg

Year Of Release
1984

Director
John Carpenter

Producer
Larry J Franco, Michael Douglas

Writer
Bruce A Evans, Raynold Gideon, Dean Riesner

Cast
Jeff Bridges, Karen Allen, Charles Martin Smith and Richard Jaeckel

Notes
Starman was put into the writing phase alongside another friendly alien film in the late 70s.
Columbia then decided to only pursue one of the two films, Starman, and sold the rights to the second script to Amblin and Universal. That second script was pushed through quickly and became E.T The Extra-Terrestrial.
As a result, Starman was put on hold until 1984, making the development of the film a 5 year project altogether.

Jeff Bridges also studied Ornithology so he could portray the movements of birds. His thinking was that an Alien in a strange body would be jerky and applied the movements to his role before eventually becoming more fluid as the character learns to use his new body.
Having Michael Douglas as Producer was a hint of genius. Many Directors had been considered for the job, including Peter Hyams, John Badham and the late Tony Scott... but Douglas pushed for John Carpenter as he believed he had the right style and stylised vision for the film.

---

Aliens from a far away system pick up on Voyager 2 and its cargo of a Gold plated record with greetings messages from the people of Earth, and they follow up on the invitation that we sent all those years ago and send a probe ship to make First Contact.

Jenny Hayden is a widower and is still mourning after her husband Scott died only a short while ago, and one night, she awakens to find an Alien in her home after it is shot down by the Military...

... and when it takes the form of Scott by using hair samples and seeing photographs and a videotape of Scott, Jenny is brought into an adventure of discovery, peril, love and loss as she helps The Starman travel across the USA, so he can go home to his people.

---

Sounds like a simple plot really. Alien, crashes, needs help.

What Starman has though is a brilliantly old school love story feel to it with the modern touch of Sci-Fi to back it up.

We're treated to what I can only describe as the most original take on any film of this kind.
The story is incredibly well handled throughout with the eye for detail, and for having the audience fill out the rest using their own imagination. There's only a handful of scenes that tell the general story behind the Starman, the rest is made up through the viewer's eyes.
It makes the film incredibly interpersonal.

The other thing is the dual story that goes on. We have "Scott" and Jenny on their Bonnie and Clyde style chase across America... the other side of it is the Military that is chasing them.

The Military side is also handled extremely well. There are a number of factors involved than just a bunch of guys hunting the runaway Alien... amongst them is Mark Shermin played by Charles Martin Smith who is a sympathiser of Jenny and the Alien.
Coming to loggerheads several times with the head of the Military over morality and common decency, it adds depth to both sides of the story we're witnessing.

The acting really though makes this film tie together.
Jeff bridges, in what is probably the best acting I've seen from him next to The Big Lebowski. Bridges research into animal behaviour and his natural talent for becoming the character are incredible to watch. He also portrays a wonderful childlike, yet incredibly wise essence at the same time which is a masterful stroke from Bridges.
I loved him in this role.
He's only credited as "Starman" too and it adds mystery to his character.

Karen Allen plays Jenny. She too is on absolute top form as the distraught widower who is thrown into a situation that would kill most people from sheer shock.
Her character change throughout is also brilliantly played by Allen. The character has a kind of realisation in that she never got to say goodbye to Scott... but the Alien, in a way, helps her with that and to get over her grief.

Bridges and Allen are magnificent in this film together.

Charles Martin Smith is also bang on. Playing the Civil Servant working alongside the Military and occasionally losing his rag with the gung-ho attitude of the men in charge. No matter what it may cost him.
CMS is utterly engaging as the nice guy with an attitude who chomps on cigars. Another role I loved in this film.
His final scene is also laugh out loud "stick it to the man" funny.

Richard Jaeckel isn't seen a great deal though for the main antagonist. He's good when seen though and his character lives with the viewer.

As for action exactly, there's not a massive amount on show. Instead we have a number of effects shots, some rotoscoping and matt painting and the occasional camera trick.
What makes the more perilous scenes work though, is the photography and the music that backs it up.
A couple shots are dated slightly though, particularly when the Alien morphs into Bridges.

The editing in this film makes it a hell of a lot more exciting than it could have been.
An example is one scene in particular: a car crash... but it's the aftermath of the crash and what Starman does when the music kicks in that make this film heart pounding.
The fact that you care about the people in the film also adds excitement.

---

All in all, a hit at time of release and still holds up strong today.
Full of intrigue and wonderful eye for detail and some of the best acting I've seen in a Sci-Fi movie.
It's also heart wrenchingly touching at times, exciting too, and Bridges is incredibly funny throughout as well when he gets out of his depth or doesn't understand our customs.

A Classic in every sense of the word.

My rating: 100%
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

05-14-14, 10:38 AM

PAGE 1
1 - Young Guns 90%
2 - A Nightmare On Elm Street (2010 Remake) 2%
3 – 2012 15%
4 - Cowboys And Aliens 85%
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 Of Horrors 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%
PAGE 35
200 – Judgment Night 93% [200th Review, 270th Movie]
PAGE 36
201 - Close Encounters Of The Third Kind 101%
PAGE 37
202 - The Bone Collector 68%
PAGE 38
203 - The Star Trek Franchise - 2 Part Rodent’s Revisited and Star Trek Into Darkness 97%
PAGE 39
204 - Chopper 93% [274]
PAGE 40
205 - Pan’s Labyrinth 101%
206 - House Of The Dead 0% [276]
PAGE 41
207 - Kick-Ass Duo 92% & 92%
208 - One Hour Photo 92%
209 - Lawless 97% [280]
210 - Prisoners 100% [281]
PAGE 42
211 - Coraline 99%
PAGE 43
212 - TRON 100% [283]
213 - TRON Legacy 100%
214 - Starman 100%

The Rodent

05-22-14, 05:09 PM

No Spoilers Contained!!

Review #215, Movie #286
X-Men: Days Of Future Past

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/0c/X-Men_Days_of_Future_Past_poster.jpg

Year Of Release

2014

Director/s

Bryan Singer

Producer/s

Lauren Shuler Donner, Bryan Singer, Simon Kinberg, Hutch Parker

Writer/s
Simon Kinberg, Matthew Vaughn, Jane Goldman

Cast

Hugh Jackman, James McAvoy, Patrick Stewart, Michael Fassbender, Ian McKellen, Jennifer Lawrence, Halle Berry, Anna Paquin, Ellen Page, Nicholas Hoult, Kelsey Grammer, Peter Dinklage, Shawn Ashmore, Omar Sy, Daniel Cudmore, Evan Peters, Lucas Till, James Marsden and Famke Janssen

---

Synopsis:
In the future, Mutants are almost extinct... a third world war has erupted between Humans, Mutants and Human Sympathisers.
Any Mutant or Human that stands alongside them is rounded up, and terminated.

Charles Xavier and Erik Lensherr now lead a small rebellion... their mission, to contact their past selves... and stop the eradication of almost two thirds of the world's population before it even happens.

Review:
Ok...

I haven't reviewed The Wolverine yet, but I have reviewed the others and The Wolverine was in my opinion the best of the bunch...

That place has now been taken.

DOFP has managed what I thought was the impossible... they've cleaned up the continuity errors, added an extra depth to the story that reinvigorates the other films... and the filmmakers have done it with style, gusto, humour, loving loyalty and a serious tone throughout too that gives X-Fans something to really get their minds engaging with.

For a start, this film feels so much more complete than the others before it, with exception to maybe The Wolverine.
They've also incorporated a running theme, albeit in almost a cameo-of-scripting kind of way, by adding memory troubles for Wolverine.

The major difference with this film though is the story writing... even though you can look at this film as a "we're sorry for the past mistakes, we'll make up for them", the filmmakers have actually managed to fix the past errors, mostly the continuity, with exceptional pieces of plotting and sequences that are not just inspired, but also exciting to watch as they unravel.
It's definitely not contrived.

There is still one continuity error that hasn't been address directly, but it's so small tbh and can easily be explained away. So it takes very little out of the actual film.

The time travelling ploy is also used brilliantly. The writers seem to have utilised genuine quantum mechanics in terms of what would actually happen if you start messing with the past.
I give that touch 3 giant, malformed Mutant thumbs up for that one

The acting is also ramped up for this one.
The characters we all love have been twisted around, tweaked, moulded around a history... and every actor involved gives everything they have, on every front, to make this an X-Film to remember.

Rather than go into each actor though, I'll just say that seeing the talent on show here, all in one film, is a sight to see and they all play off one another beautifully.
Jackman however, carries this film even though it's not actually all about Wolverine this time round.
He has proven his solidity as a leading man in this one.

Were also treated to some exceptional action and effects sequences too.
Take the last few X-Films, they're good, but comparing them to DOFP, they're small scale. Not Superman The Movie Vs Man Of Steel small scale, that would just be a bit too much... but DOFP balances the brilliantly written story against the backdrop of genuine peril and extremely well choreographed action scenes and CGI/Practical scenes perfectly.

---

All in all, the best X-Film so far, very easily.
Exciting, fantastic action, brilliantly written, brilliantly executed and filled with recognisable and not-so-recognisable characters that we all actually know and love.
It's that good, it actually makes the others better. Can't rave enough about this film, and now, about the franchise as a whole either.
My last ratings were 84% for X1, 87% for X2, 89% for X3, 81% for Origins and 82% for First Class... I'd rate The Wolverine at 91% had I done a review of it.

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)

rating_5

seanc

05-23-14, 12:00 PM

Watched xmen last night. Its not getting a perfect score from me but its a solid film. I agree with everything your saying about it. Hard to make a film with this many moving parts coherent and entertaining but they do. How about the jail break? Pretty great. Probably got the biggest audience response at my theater.

The Rodent

05-23-14, 12:02 PM

I mentioned that in the DOFP thread. Never have I seen an entire cinema laugh like that.
Quicksilver is one funny mutant.

I was still giggling 10 minutes afterward whenever it popped into my head.

Yoda

06-03-14, 01:13 PM

ATTENTION: RODENT.

http://www.digitaltrends.com/movies/robocop-statue-unveiled-today-detroit-part-robocop-day/#!T36Ox

The Rodent

06-03-14, 01:18 PM

Nice... I was wondering if that statue would ever get made. There was so much hassle getting it together.

That last line is good though, "... as it should be"

The Rodent

06-05-14, 05:29 PM

Over the next few days/weeks... I'll be repeating some of my reviews...

It's so that the reviews I did of, for instance, Star Trek 1-12 can be put into the MoFo Reviews Page... franchise reviews don't really work well with the layout so basically I'm breaking them down into singular reviews.

Rep if you want, :D... but you don't have to (you do)

The Rodent

06-05-14, 05:41 PM

Star Trek 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)
rating_5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 05:43 PM

Star Trek 2: 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)
rating_5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 05:46 PM

Star Trek 3: 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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 05:48 PM

Star Trek 4: 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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 05:50 PM

Star Trek 5: 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)
4

The Sci-Fi Slob

06-05-14, 05:50 PM

Nice reviews. The Wrath of Kahn has always been my favorite.The Search for Spock is probably the third best of the original crew films, after The Undiscovered Country

The Rodent

06-05-14, 05:51 PM

Star Trek 6: 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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 05:54 PM

Star Trek 7: 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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 05:55 PM

Star Trek 8: 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)
4

sickgirl

06-05-14, 05:56 PM

Although I love Star Trek (the original series), I have not seen a single episode of TNG or any of the movies but now I really want to.

The Rodent

06-05-14, 05:57 PM

Star Trek 9: 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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 05:58 PM

Star Trek 10: 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)
4.5

The Sci-Fi Slob

06-05-14, 05:58 PM

I have not seen a single episode of TNG or any of the movies.

http://media0.giphy.com/media/Pb419ihn0e4ZW/200.gif

The Rodent

06-05-14, 06:00 PM

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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 06:01 PM

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)
5

sickgirl

06-05-14, 06:02 PM

I know. I'm very ashamed. To be fair, I was busy with high school up until June 2013 but then I spent all the time between June 2013 to June 2014 sulking. I have no excuse. I'm sorry.

The Rodent

06-05-14, 06:03 PM

sickgirl

06-05-14, 06:06 PM

That's me done for repeats for tonight... that's 10 of them out the way :D

Cheers for the reps, Slob!

Thank you too, sickgirl!
Hope my reviews have opened your eyes to a new cinematic experience... biggest compliment I can receive to be honest. You'll like the Trek films for sure.

I'm really glad you liked the reboots!!! My 10th grade English teacher showed me the Star Trek 2009 reboot and that's how I actually got into the series. A lot of people don't seem to like the reboots though but I'm really glad you do :)

The Rodent

06-05-14, 06:08 PM

I found them a lot stronger than the originals...

Loved Into Darkness though. Great film.

sickgirl

06-05-14, 06:12 PM

I found them a lot stronger than the originals...

Loved Into Darkness though. Great film.

I agree. I'm not a very big fan of Benedict Cumberbatch but I thought he did a great job.

The Rodent

06-05-14, 07:40 PM

Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope.

What was initially set as a stand-alone movie under the title of Star Wars, it has become something that has shaped the movie world forever. It’s hard to imagine how big the movie was at the time of release but it broke the mould in many unbreakable places.

Set in and around an ongoing war between the evil Galactic Empire and a group of Rebels, a young farm boy called Luke Skywalker dreams of leaving his hum-drum life and heading out among the stars to fight the evil Empire.
Holding him back is his uncle, Owen. All Owen wants is for Luke not to end up like his father, Anakin.

Upon buying androids (C3PO and R3D2) from some Jawa (alien) traders, Luke is plunged into a world of mystery when R2D2 suddenly plays back a recording of a woman in distress and is asking for the help of somebody called Obi Wan Kenobi. Luke makes an assumption that Obi Wan may be related to Old Ben, a kind of old hermit who lives not far away.

The following morning, R2D2 has vanished and Luke and C3PO go looking for him, in the process they stumble across Old Ben. Ben watches R2D2’s recording and asks Luke and his droids to help him in fighting the Empire. Luke turns down the offer, but forces outside of Luke’s control push him into following Ben out into the stars and off to grand adventure.
Along the way, Ben has told Luke about the truth of who his father was and that he will teach him about an almost extinct way of life, the life of a Jedi and how to harness and use the powers of a mystical force known simply as The Force.
By the end, Luke joins the Rebels and pits himself against the Empire’s greatest weapon, the Death Star.

The movie is a benchmark for not just sci-fi, but any and all adventure and action films.
The story and the characters, the setting and settings, in fact the entire universe that George Lucas created when making the movie is incredibly realised. It’s dirty, grimy, well used, old and feels very real.

Almost every detail has been thought about, from the sounds to the creatures to the vehicles. It’s incredibly original.
It’s as the movie’s start sequence says, "A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away".

It’s small at the start and grows into something far grander, then grows some more.

The movie contains hits of humour too. Mainly between Han Solo and Chewbacca as a soul-mate duo and between the droids C3PO and R2D2 as another soul-mate buddy couple. The droids in particular are laugh out loud at times, especially when they argue.

The special effects in the movie add another depth to the story, they’re extremely well developed. Even today, they hold up against most CG films.
The acting in the movie is exceptionally well directed. Lucas had the gumption to hire unknowns in the lead roles, with the exception of Sir Alec Guinness as Old Ben and Harrison Ford as the space pirate/smuggler Han Solo.
Mark Hamill and Carrie Fisher were moments of genius. Hamill’s naivety as an actor makes the character’s naivety work even better and Fisher is absolutely perfect as the young but educated Princess in distress.
Alec Guinness as the old, wise wizard is a marvel. He encapsulates the character and lifts it from the page wonderfully.

Initially, Harrison Ford was only hired to help the casting director with reading lines for the other applicants, thankfully, they saw something in him and took him on as Han Solo. He does a tremendous job as the dashing, cocky, self-assured yet occasionally bumbling, loveable space pirate.

Ford and Fisher’s on screen chemistry is wonderful too. They start out hating each other, but you know deep down they fancy each other. They bounce off each other brilliantly.
As for characters, Darth Vader, who made it to #4 in my Top 40 Villains is an absolute icon of the well made and realised movie character. He is the epitome of theatrical evilness. With James Earl Jones voicing Vader, he has the screen presence that rivals anyone else.

A fault with the movie? Hmm. Not a lot really.
There are times you can tell that the film is the first of it’s kind. The odd show of naivety from the filmmaker/s shows through in the writing and direction, but it’s so easily missed, it barely makes a difference.

What makes the movie really hit home though, is when it’s tied in with John Williams’ brilliant, unforgettable and iconic soundtrack.

All in all, one of the finest sci-fi/space movies made. Everything about it shaped the genre and is still held in many respects as the God of modern film.

My rating 100%

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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 07:41 PM

Star Wars Episode V: The Empire Strikes Back.

Being that Star Wars was said to originally be a stand-alone movie, the fact that it was such a huge hit, Lucas decided to expand his idea into a full on franchise and redub Star Wars as Episode IV A New Hope.
We, the audience were then treated to Episode V.
The story revolves around Luke doing some more in-depth study into the Jedi ways that Ben showed him in the first movie. He’s been drawn toward a distant planet to find a man called ‘Yoda’. Upon arriving, he discovers Yoda is actually a little green goblin looking thing that speaks in a strange way. Though Yoda is more than meets the eye.

In a separate storyline, Leia and Solo have been fighting their feelings for one another, or that’s what Solo thinks anyway.
Solo has another mission too. He has to face the brutal gangster Jabba The Hutt, who has put a bounty on his head.

Introduced to the story is an old acquaintance of Solo’s, a man called Lando Calrissian.
After an attack from the Empire, Solo, Chewbacca and Leia have fled to Lando’s city for refuge, unwittingly though, they’re heading into even more danger, especially for Solo.

It’s up to Luke though, after seeing their predicament in a ‘vision’ he heads off to save them, leaving his new mentor, Yoda, to brood.

Cue one of the biggest plot twists in movie history and something that nobody could have seen coming.

As a sequel, it’s another masterclass in it’s own right. It far outweighs the original.

The universe is expanded extensively and there are more highly original characters and settings, planets and societies seen in the film.
It’s a much grander look at the new universe that Lucas created.

The story too is far more extensive. It’s easy to follow but has many, many subtle levels and sub-stories. The introduction of new characters is another easy to follow point but allows the movie to broaden its horizons vastly.

What hits the movie hard though, is that it isn’t the average ‘hero wins at the end’ kind of film. The ending is a rather sombre cliff-hanger. Relatively downbeat and leaves the audience wanting more.

The cast are all still on top form. This time round Billy Dee Williams as Lando Calrissian is an added element of coolness and charm. He’s like Solo, but with more money and political power.

The special effects are another far bigger and better element of the movie. Obviously the success of the first movie allowed Lucas to pile more money into them and it really shows. The sets too are far grander.

Again, like with the first film, I’m finding it very hard to find any faults with the movie. This time round Lucas’ naivety has vanished and the change in director has ironed out all the creases of Episode IV.

All in all a vast improvement on Episode IV’s already perfect lead up.
My rating is another 100%

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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 07:41 PM

Star Wars Episode VI: Return Of The Jedi.

Revolving around Luke living with the aftermath of the plot twist in Episode V and a rescue attempt of Solo at the beginning.
Luke eventually then takes up his training again with Yoda and has many of his questions answered about that plot twist.

Yoda then gives Luke a new mission. He must face and defeat Vader and become a fully-fledged Jedi Knight. One thing that stands in Luke’s way though, is that Vader’s Master, The Emperor, has decided to show his ugly mug and will be there when Luke and Vader clash their lightsabres together one last time.

Leia, Solo, Chewbacca, the droids and Lando take their own separate line again too, a Rebel attack is forming against a new, more powerful Death Star. It’s up to them to lead the attack on various fronts and stop the Empire’s new super weapon.

The third of the original trilogy is a darker looking take on the franchise. Its brooding, moody atmosphere can put people off but it’s an element that really makes the subject matter work.
The subject matter in question is Luke, Vader and The Emperor in a three-way battle to turn Luke and his new found Jedi powers to the Dark Side Of The Force. It’s a brave move but it hits the nail on the head.

It’s a very low tone movie and takes a more serious turn of events too. The comedy and humour seen between the main characters in the first two movies is dropped and replaced with a more depressed feel.

There is still some comic relief in the form of a tribe of primitive space-bears called Ewoks. The tribe becomes an important plot device in helping Solo, Chewbacca and Leia in their fight against the Empire. So it’s not a total loss on the humour front.

There isn’t much of an expansion in the universe either, but the film certainly utilises what the first two built so well. It’s more of a ‘wrap-up’ for the franchise rather than another ‘build-on’ movie.

As for the effects, they seem the same as in Episode V. There’s no real improvement as such but they’re certainly not lacking. I think that the technology of the time was at its peak and basically, they couldn’t improve any more than they already had.

The acting from all parties is again, spot on. By now the actors knew their roles and have aged well with the franchise, both mentally and physically and it shows through their performances.

Sadly, the bad point is the lack of swashbuckling charm that was seen in the first two films. It’s a more linear movie in terms of writing and there’s little in the way of expanding the world that Lucas built.

All in all it’s a slight step backward from the first two, definitely a step back from Episode V though it’s still a romping space adventure and is a wonderfully brooding end to a fantastic build up.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 07:42 PM

Star Wars Episode I: The Phantom Menace.

After years of waiting, the fans of the Star Wars franchise got what they wanted, but sadly, not what they wanted.
Set 30 years or so before Episode IV, the movie revolves around the Trade Federation placing a blockade of their battleships around the planet of Naboo.
This of course brings the Galactic Senate into play. They send two Jedi Knights, Master Qui Gon Jin and his apprentice Obi Wan Kenobi, to bring an end to the trade dispute (the Jedi in this movie are as Old Ben said in Episode IV, "Guardians of Peace and Justice").
In turn, this causes the Trade Federation to act irrationally under the orders of a Master Sith Lord called Darth Sidious and they land a ground invasion of the planet.

Queen Amidala of The Naboo, under the protection of the Jedi and must do everything in her power to either politically stop the invaders, or resort to more violent measures to save her planet and her people.

In the midst of this is a young boy called Anakin Skywalker who has been spotted by Jedi Master Qui Gon as being very powerful with The Force. Qui Gon takes Anakin under his wing and introduces him into the world of the Jedi, without the consent of the Jedi Council.

It’s a very simplistic story that feels very simplistic. The original pull of Episode IV was that the simple story was utilised and expanded with decent writing, touches of tragedy and subtle humour. Lucas seems to have just gone for a simple story laced with amusing characters called Jar-Jar Binks and slapstick frog looking CG creatures. Then smeared the whole thing with brightly coloured CGI and high-speed chases.

It’s very cashed in. You feel great when the movie starts, but after around 25 minutes, you start getting fed up with it all.

The CGI isn’t great looking either, with the massive amounts of cash and talent thrown at the movie, it should have been a hell of a lot better than just an expensive cartoon.

The acting, well, Liam Neeson and Ewan McGregor as the Jedi Knights are spot on. They’re fit, athletic and have studied hard at the sabre fights. They carry their roles perfectly too. McGregor in particular is fantastic as the young Alec Guinness. A very good choice of actors.
Natalie Portman is apt as Queen Amidala but nothing that will win awards.

Jake Lloyd as Anakin Skywalker is one massive mistake from the filmmakers. Ok he’s only a young lad, but surely there are other kids out there that can actually act.
For such an important role, Lucas really missed the mark. If a young enough actor couldn’t be found, why didn’t Lucas just age Anakin’s character a year or two to make sure the role was acted properly?

The story involves an almost love story between Anakin and Amidala. They make friends when they meet and the actors try their best at working with Lucas’ lacklustre writing, but it’s just not believable.

One of the biggest let downs of the film is Lucas’ new take on the Jedi way of life in regard to The Force.

Apparently this all-powerful force that surrounds us and binds the galaxy together is actually a bunch of microscopic creatures that live inside all living things.
I’m sorry, but where the hell did that come from, George?
It would appear you’ve completely smashed a major plot point for the entire franchise. Bell*nd.
　
Before I carry on with this review, I’m just popping out into the garden for a minute. I’ve got some battery acid that needs pouring on my award-winning Rose Garden…
　
… aaah, much better. Now, on with the review.

The action though, I will say, is very well choreographed. Visually it’s exciting and fast paced and the lightsabre battles are the highlight of the movie. But sadly, that’s about it.

Episode I, was the most anticipated movie in history. The question being asked by fans was, "Where did the story begin?"
Sadly, it started in a thrown together excuse for a prequel hidden under a blanket of CGI.

Add to that, Qui Gon Jinn’s use of a tarted-up Ladies’ Sensor Excel Leg-Razor as a communications device and you’ve got a sure-fire stinker.

All in all a disappointing start to the new trilogy.
My rating 20%

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)
rating_1

The Rodent

06-05-14, 07:44 PM

Star Wars Episode II: Attack Of The Clones.

With the debacle that was Episode I, you’d have thought Lucas would have learned his lesson and improved the new trilogy. Sadly again, he didn’t.

The movie revolves around Obi wan Kenobi’s and Anakin Skywalker’s adventures around the galaxy.
A bounty hunter named Django Fett has been hired as a mould for a Clone Army, ordered in secret by a (now dead) Jedi Knight.
Obi Wan is sent to the planet Kamino to investigate this disturbing event and let the council know what the truth of the matter is.
Anakin has been reassigned to protect Amidala (now a Senator) as an unknown party and an unknown assassin have targeted her for termination.

Anakin and Amidala’s love story is expanded on as they spend more time together alone in hiding. Eventually finding a common ground and falling in love.

Anakin’s feelings of jealousy toward other Jedi and his delusions of grandeur show a hotter side to his temperament. Eventually a murderous side surfaces when he returns to his home planet of Tatooine and is met with family tragedy.
Obi Wan in the interim has discovered more about the Clone Army and has discovered that the Trade Federation are still up to no good and are working alongside another Sith Lord called Count Dooku and an alien race called the Geonosians to build a super weapon.
Eventually Obi Wan is captured while snooping and Anakin and Amidala decide to rescue him.
In the meantime, the Jedi Council have gathered all the nearby Jedi and are also heading to Obi Wan’s aide. The Jedi have utilised the Clone soldiers too, to aide them in fighting Dooku, the Trade Federation and the Geonosians.
At the end, Anakin and Amidala marry in secret.

The movie is far more action orientated. It’s full of chases and sabre fights and relies extremely heavily on CGI.
The movie as a whole feels as though Lucas wanted to stick the characters in as many different (and unentertaining) CG cartoon situations as possible.

Yoda, C3PO, the Jedi, the Clones and even Django Fett are all, at some point, turned into a CG character.
R2D2 can apparently fly now too.

It’s incredibly gimmicky and cliché. It’s almost an experiment in what they can do with CGI.

You can tell also that Lucas didn’t have a single set built for the film. It’s all green-screen. All of it.
The writing too is substandard.

Lucas’ take on romance between two beautiful young people is incredibly cringe-worthy.
A child could have written it in crayon and still given it more passion and chemistry.

McGregor is again spot on though as Obi Wan, but you can see he’s starting to wonder what he’s doing in such a pile.
Portman is more wooden this time around. Though she tries her best with the poor script, she seems fed up too.
Count Dooku is a mild highlight. A star turn from Christopher Lee brings a touch of campness to the movie. Eventually though, he too is turned into a CG character.

Anakin Skywalker is again, played by a complete muppet.
Hayden Christensen has absolutely no charisma and recites his lines as though he’s forgetting them as he does so.
He also has no chemistry with love-interest Portman. He’s apt with a lightsabre though but sadly it’s just not enough. Two great big thumbs down from me. He’s actually worse than Jake Lloyd.

To be honest, I’m finding it hard to find a good point on this one. Even the huge Jedi/Clone fight on Geonosia is a bit of a miss affair. It looks thrilling and flashy, it’s just got no substance.

I’m thinking the storyline is better suited to Star Wars than Episode I was. Anakin’s darker side is expanded to an extent, but it doesn’t save the movie.

All in all the worst of the Star Wars franchise, a better story than Episode I but still not anything worthy of the Star Wars title.
My rating 5%

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)
0.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 07:45 PM

Star Wars Episode III: Revenge Of The Sith.

Almost back to basics for the franchise.

Revolving around Anakin’s fall into the Dark Side Of The Force.
He has been sent with Obi Wan to rescue Chancellor Palpatine from the clutches of another bad guy called General Grievous. Grievous is the commander of a droid army and is working along side Dooku. Both however are under the command of Darth Sidious.
After the rescue of Palpatine, they all return to the planet of Coruscant (home of the Jedi Council and the Galactic Senate) and Anakin meets up with Amidala.
She drops the news on him that she is pregnant with his child. This tears Anakin’s feelings inside. Does he stay with her and admit everything to the Council and risk his future with the Jedi, or keep everything secret with her and risk being caught out?

In the meantime, Obi Wan has been sent on a mission to recapture General Grievous without Anakin by his side, which upsets him even further.
To make things worse, Anakin’s having visions of Amidala dying in childbirth.
Finding solace with Chancellor Palpatine, Anakin has his ego blown up by Palpatine’s praises and seeds of doubts are also sown when Palpatine says the Jedi don’t trust Anakin. Palpatine starts sowing seeds of temptation when he mentions that the Dark Side is much more powerful than the Jedi’s power.

With seeds sown, Palpatine reveals his true purpose in the story and Anakin’s fall to the Dark Side is completed when he kills a Jedi Master. Upon meeting the newly appointed Emperor, Anakin is redubbed as Darth Vader.

It’s now up to Obi Wan and Yoda to bring an end to this startling turn of events before Vader’s murderous rampage wipes out all of the Jedi in the galaxy.

Episode III is by far the best written of the prequels in terms of story.
Lucas’ dialogue is still childlike but the story is far superior to the first two.
It’s complex and yet is still easy to follow.

There isn’t a massive expansion in the universe per-say, but the expansion of the Anakin/Emperor/Amidala/Kenobi circle is very well pieced together.
Anakin’s fall, (though loosely told in this review) is a very realised sequence of events. It’s very real in the fact that Anakin doesn’t realise he’s actually now a bad guy.

The effects of the movie, though heavily CGI, are much better placed than in the first two prequels. They’re less cartoony and edge more toward real looking. They’re also utilised in a more viewer friendly way rather than just smashed into your face with colourful abandonment.

The action in the movie, particularly between Obi Wan and Vader is an absolute joy to watch. They really went all out for the sabre fight.
It does go a little awry when they throw some CG fire and explosions in there though. All the audience needed was Kenobi Vs Vader.

As for the acting, Hayden Christensen is quite a shock as Anakin. He must have had acting lessons between the two movies. He’s still not perfect, but he’s certainly improved.
McGregor and Portman do apt jobs as usual and Portman and Christensen have more of a chemistry on screen this time round too.

The movie as a whole is similar to Return Of The Jedi. It’s darker and more brooding than its predecessors. It’s much more violent too, it’s the only Star Wars movie to be rated higher than a PG. In Britain it carries a 12 certificate.

All in all not a perfect movie, still nowhere near to the original trilogy, but far superior to Episodes I & II.
My rating 55%

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)
3

The Rodent

06-05-14, 07:50 PM

Superman: The Movie.

The premise of the first movie is around Kal-El being sent to earth by his father and mother, as the planet Krypton is due to be destroyed by a natural disaster.
Upon his arrival on earth, he is a small child and is discovered by a friendly, homely couple called Martha and Jonathan Kent. They raise him as their own on their farm and name him ‘Clark’.
Eventually the day comes for Clark has to leave home to discover his heritage after finding a green crystal in the barn amongst the wreckage of the comet/ship that he came to earth in.

After 12 years of study in the hidden Fortress Of Solitude, he returns to the world as an all-powerful "Super Man" and moves into the city of Metropolis and, as Clark, he gets a job as a reporter with The Daily Planet Newspaper.
After only a day or so, he shows himself to the world and is dubbed Superman by his Daily Planet Newspaper work colleague, Lois Lane.
What awaits him though is arch criminal Lex Luthor. A brilliant mind yet is, as always, slightly inept at taking on the Supe.

It’s a beautifully shot movie, the action scenes are extremely well choreographed and the writing of the characters is absolutely spot on.
The story contains many aspects of great cinema, tragedy, seriousness and tongue in cheek humour. Mix to that a great cast who can carry all of these aspects, you’ve got something very, very special.

The acting too is fantastic.

Hiring the unknown Christopher Reeve as Superman/Clark Kent was a mark of genius by the filmmakers. He doesn’t just change his acting style, his physical appearance changes too. As the Supe he’s tall, powerful, confident and very charming. You genuinely believe he is indestructible. As Clark, he slouches, becomes uncomfortable and bumbling, incompetent in most situations and he carries the role in a way that nobody else could have even imagined. Reeve has the perfect split personality for a super-hero.
Margot Kidder as Lois Lane too is a mark of genius. Ok Kidder’s other films are almost unheard of and her acting has never been great, but as Lois she really shines. She was born to play the role.
Gene Hackman is another great choice as Lex Luthor. Hackman is as always, fun to watch, engaging, theatrical and campy as the villain.
Ned Beattie as Luthor’s dummy sidekick Otis is an absolute marvel to watch. He’s incredibly funny and Valerie Perrine adds some sexy-class as the gangster’s Moll.

The movie’s effects are a little primitive by today’s standards, though at the time the effects were absolutely cutting edge. Though today, they do still work.
You genuinely believe a man can fly (ahem).

The only thing that lets the movie down, is that you can tell some of the scenes are experimental. A movie like this had never been made before and though the makers did a fantastic job, their naivety occasionally shows.

All in all, one the finest super-hero movies ever made. Often copied, never bettered. A definite must see.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 07:51 PM

Superman 2

Set not long after the first movie, Clark has settled into his duel role of Clark/Superman.
He’s found feelings for Lois and she too has found feelings for the Supe, let’s face it, all the girls in the city love him. She treats Clark quite ignorantly though, he is after all just a nerdy work colleague.

The main story revolves around three other people however.
Superman has unwittingly released kryptonian villains General Zod, Ursa and Non from their prison.
Kal-El’s father Jor-El had imprisoned the three villains in the ‘Phantom Zone’ at the beginning of the first movie before Krypton was destroyed.
Supe’s destruction of a nuclear weapon in space has cracked the ‘zone’ and freed them. They’re now heading for earth, endowed with all the same powers as Superman.
Upon realising Superman is the son of their jailer (Jor-El), they make their prime objective: To enslave and crush him and then rule the rest of the world.
Aiding them, is a returning Lex Luthor.

Cue lots of destruction and plenty of fistfights between Superman and the three super-villains.

There is a twist in the story for Superman himself too before he is able to fight the villains.

The film, like the first, is a masterclass in how to stage a super-hero movie. The writing and storyline are again near perfect. It starts off small and then rapidly grows in scale to something more thrilling.

Again the acting is bang on.
This time round the cast involves Terrence Stamp as Zod, Sarah Douglas as Ursa and Jack O’Halloran as the mute powerhouse Non.
Stamp made it into my top 40 movie villains at #15. He’s very camp, inhinged and is the epitome of the super-villain.
Sarah Douglas adds more sexy-class as a villain-ess and O’Halloran is perfect as a giant brute with absolutely no intelligence.
The special effects are utilised with more pizzazz than in the first. The money was very well spent, in particular on the four-way Metropolis fight.

To be honest, in terms of faults, I’m finding it hard to find any. Maybe one thing would be the use of the miniatures in the special effects. Ok CGI was unheard of at the time, but every now and then the miniature work is too obvious.

All in all, believe it or not, it’s actually an improvement on the first, better in every way. Another definite 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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 07:52 PM

Superman 3

Sadly, this is where the Superman series started dropping off the scale.
The movie revolves around Gus Gorman (played by Richard Pryor). He’s an unwitting and unwilling computer genius, hired by his corrupt boss to control satellites in a bid to destroy his rivals’ businesses.
Superman of course throws a spanner in the works and becomes the target of the villains’ custom-built super-computer.

The movie itself is a product of its time. Super computer paranoia and weather changing satellites.
It goes heavily toward comedy too and steers clear of the elements that made the first two so special: Tragedy, tongue in cheek humour, campness and action.
It’s very slapstick and cliché. Turning Superman into a bad guy could have been worth while, but with the simplistic way he gets out of his predicament, it just didn’t work.

The defining feature is Pryor. He adds his own personal touch to the comedy and plays his role brilliantly, but he’s out of place in the franchise.
No show from Hackman.
Margot Kidder is written out of this one too, she appears briefly but isn’t seen throughout the rest of the movie.
Reeve is as always spot on.

All in all a hit and miss affair, mainly miss. Worth watching if you’re under 10 years old.
My rating 70%

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)
3.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 07:52 PM

Superman 4: The Quest For Peace

This was the final nail in the coffin for the Supe. Written on an idea by Reeve himself but slashed budgets and infighting within the studios the movie suffers terribly.
The movie is another product of its time. This time based on Nuclear War. Superman decides to destroy all the nukes in the world by throwing them at the Sun.
Luthor returns and attaches some of Superman’s DNA and a computer chip to a nuke. Somehow it creates a super-villain with all of Superman’s powers. Luthor then pits his creation against the Supe.

It’s an extremely bad piece of movie making. The story could have worked but the way the movie was made just feels incredibly cheap.
The special effects were obviously cut from the budget. They look cheap and make the poorly shot action scenes even more lacking.

Many of Superman’s ‘solves’ to Nuclearman’s attacks are simply rewound footage of the catastrophe he created. Yes, really!

Supe and Lois are put together in a kind of love story and Reeve and Kidder are able to carry the roles ok, but they seem fed up with it all. Kidder is also starting to look too old for the part.

Mariel Hemingway is incredibly wooden as Clark’s new squeeze.
Mark Pillow as the super-villain just isn’t very threatening. He just shows his teeth and frowns a bit.

Jon Cryer as Luthor’s nephew is just annoying as a kind of ‘yo dude’ character.
Hackman is probably the best part of it all. He hits his role professionally as always and never misses a beat.

All in all, miss this one. It’s the worst movie I’ve ever seen.
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)
0

The Rodent

06-05-14, 07:53 PM

Superman Returns.

A nostalgic turn from the filmmakers brings the audience some of the magic from the first two movies.
The storyline evades Superman 3 & 4 and carries on after the events of Superman 2 as if 3 & 4 didn’t exist.

It revolves around Clark doing some searching. Scientists believe that they have found Krypton using powerful telescopes and he has just returned from a journey to see if it really is there.
Upon his return to earth he discovers that Luthor has been released from prison and has stolen Supe’s crystals from the Fortress Of Solitude and plans on using them as a weapon.

The simplistic story works, but it’s just not enough. Brandon Routh as the Reeve-looking Superman works to an extent, but he has none of the charisma of Reeve and he barely changes character when playing Clark.
I can’t help but feel that the movie needed more than just the gimmick of nostalgia. It needed expanding, I’m not sure how, but it needed it.
Ok, Supe’s twist at the end is something I didn’t see, but it still needed something braver.

The best part of the movie by far is Kevin Spacey as Luthor. He doesn’t try to emulate Hackman. He turns the role into his own and makes it better in the process.
Brandon Routh and Kate Bosworth do an apt job at pretending to be Reeve and Kidder, but they just aren’t.

The movie as a whole is entertaining. It’s just a very nostalgic miss on all fronts.
There’s not much else I can say about Superman Returns, though I really wish there was…

All in all, worth a watch, but it’ll leave you just as quick as it makes its impression.
My rating is a mid 50%

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)
2.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 07:56 PM

Pirates Of The Caribbean: The Curse Of The Black Pearl

Started as a project based on the Disney ride, Black Pearl is a movie that has invigorated the Pirate Genre.
Cutthroat Island starring Geena Davis tried it, but it failed worse than miserably, pushing the genre back to the point of obscurity.

Screen writers Ted Elliot, Terry Rossio, Stuart Beattie and Jay Wolpert thought differently.
Getting Gore Verbinski as director was another wise move, his natural imagination is a wonder.

For a start, using the famous Disney ride as a platform is a mark of genius. They’ve expanded the ‘story’ of the ride beautifully and have created a world of pure imagination, urban legend, slapstick, raw humour, love, terror and action.

The premise of the story revolves around the Black Pearl, a pirate ship who’s crew carries a curse. All they want is to lift said curse and get back to ‘honest pirating’.
Mixed into that, Captain Jack Sparrow, an original Captain of the ship, just wants the ship back in his command and Will Turner, a young blacksmith just wants to get back his one true love, Elizabeth Swan, from the cursed crew who have kidnapped her. She’s also a Damsel-In-Distress with a difference.

The movie is wonderfully playful, very tongue in cheek and, extremely well and beautifully shot.

The acting is absolutely spot on, the actors seem to just know their roles inside and out from the get go. There’s no messing around finding their place.

Johnny Depp in particular is fascinating as Jack Sparrow. He’s become a legend of the pirate world in only a very short time. Intelligent and sly yet loveable and beautifully charismatic.
As too is Geoffrey Rush as Captain Barbossa. He’s the perfect south-western English pirate, evil, cunning and knows exactly what and where he’s going, only occasionally fooled by Sparrow.
Orlando Bloom as Will Turner seems a little held back at the start but when the going gets tough, his role really reveals it’s self.

As for the special effects, particularly when the computers are brought into play for the cursed crew, they certainly don’t fail the eye. They’re raw, animated and work extremely well for the subject matter. The one on one between Barbossa and Sparrow is fantastic.

The on fault I’d say with the film is that it could do with a little more scope. It feels relatively small scale in terms of story and universe.

All in all a fun ride with some perfect writing and characters that really hit the mark, definitely the modern Swashbuckler.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 07:57 PM

Pirates Of The Caribbean: Dead Man’s Chest

The first movie was supposedly set as a stand-alone film, though, this is Hollywood and Black Pearl was such a huge hit, the sequel was inevitable.

Further more, it doesn’t disappoint. Not by a long shot.

The story revolves around Davy Jones and his crew and Jack Sparrow. Sparrow owes a debt to Jones and, obviously, doesn’t want to pay. Jones will stop at nothing to get what he’s owed. This time, Elizabeth Swan is called into the story as not just the Damsel-In-Distress, but as a force in her own right after Will Turner is the one in need of help after Davy Jones takes him aboard his ship. A kind of reversal in Will and Elizabeth’s storyline.

As a whole it’s bigger, brasher, funnier and grander and hits the nail on the head in almost every respect.

The action is brilliantly choreographed and the CGI is even better. The movie does tend to rely on more CGI than it’s predecessor, but it’s utilised perfectly for Jones and his crew, who mirror Barbossa’s crew from the first film as being cursed (to an extent).

Again, the acting from all parties is bang on the money. There’s expansion on some of the existing characters and a few new faces to add to the various pirate crews, though it’s easy to follow and fun to watch, the writing is brilliantly put to screen.

Nighy in particular, as the Scottish ghost-boat Captain Davy Jones, made it to #1 in my top 40 movie villains of all time. He’s absolutely brilliant.

A fault with the film is that Jones and his crew’s story is kept under wraps. You get a taster of their past, but nothing more. No real expansion.

All in all it hits the same places as the first movie but is a better movie and a brilliant piece of writing again from Ted Elliot and Terry Rossio.
Verbinski’s direction is another piece of artwork.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 07:58 PM

Pirates Of The Caribbean: At World’s End

The third of the original trilogy feels a bit of a step backward sadly. It’s better than the first film, but not as good as the second.

It suffers from Star Wars syndrome.

The movie revolves around Barbossa, Turner and Elizabeth having to rescue Sparrow from Davy Jones’ clutches in a desperate attempt to bring together the ‘Pirate Lords’ in a final stand-off against the East India Trading Corporation who in turn, are using Davy Jones and his invincible crew as a weapon.

The whole universe of the pirate world created by the writers is expanded on extensively, there’s more Swashbuckling, more wonderfully rendered CGI (in many ways the CGI is better) and the cast of actors are still, all hitting their roles with perfection.

The movie’s storyline is extremely well put together, it’s relatively complicated but easy to follow, the expansion of character storylines and additions of new characters is something that, as I said, the second movie lacked.
This one has it all in that respect.

But, sadly, this movie also has its faults.
It feels as though the whole thing was pieced together in a rush to get it done before people lost interest.
It feels very gimmicky. It’s more ‘actiony’, even with the expansion of the universe and the storylines and goes more toward a feeling of seriousness rather than the tongue in cheek humour of the first two.

Almost to the point of becoming a parody of the genre that the first two films have successfully recreated.
　
All in all it’s better than the first, but a step backward from the second, still though, it is a fun ride to take and wonderfully grand in scale.
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 Rodent

06-05-14, 08:03 PM

Indiana Jones: Raiders Of The Lost Ark

A schoolteacher and archaeologist, Dr Henry Walton ‘Indiana’ Jones, is called into action to locate and/or discover what is believed to be the Ark of the Covenant.
Also on the trail of the Ark however, are the Nazis and Indiana Jones has to stop them before they can use it’s power to plunge the world into darkness.
‘Tagging’ along is Indy’s ex-girlfriend and old cohort, Marian Ravenwood. What awaits the duo is something greater than either can imagine and powerful enough to look into their very souls.

The first and original movie is an all time great, it mixes elements of all genres: Western, adventure, mystery, mythology, comedy, tragedy, and to an extent even a touch of sci-fi mixed in with mystical magic.

It’s an absolute masterpiece in how to write and carry out a story. The scene placement and look of the film is absolutely bang on with the old-school feel of grand adventure and discovery. Lucas and Spielberg have even been noted as saying they wanted to encapsulate the old adventure stories seen on TV in the 1930s and they really have managed it.

The effects of the movie are another good point. Most of the film is practical, explosions, gunfights etc and is extremely well choreographed. It’s only near the end that the computers and other special effects are brought into play and even by today’s standard, they hold up extremely well.

The action too is very well put together. It’s very heroic and engaging and Indy’s character is different to most as he has a human side and is vulnerable during fights. It’s not the run-of-the-mill-relentless-march-of-victory that’s seen in most film s of its type.

The acting from all parties is also bang on the money.
Harrison Ford was born to play Indy. Not only does he look right for the role, he’s smooth with the women, tough in a fight, rugged around the edges, yet is at times extremely approachable and friendly. He’s also as I said, vulnerable, which gives him a real side.
Karen Allen as Marian is another wonderful touch. She’s also tough and yet extremely vulnerable when she’s in jeopardy. Allen plays the role as almost a tomboy with a heart.

Mixing to all that, John Williams’ awesome soundtrack, it’s a sure-fire classic.
It’s extremely difficult to find a fault with the movie. It’s definitely a one of a kind.

All in all a great adventure/mystery/discovery and full of laughs and tragedy too. One for the history books.
My rating 100%

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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:04 PM

Indiana Jones: Temple Of Doom

Indy and his little protégé, Shorty Round and a beautiful singer called Willie Scott, find themselves trapped in India after an old acquaintance tries to kill Indy. While there they come across a village that has a sacred stone taken from the village temple and that their children have also been stolen.
The village Elders believe that Indy has been sent from the Gods to help them.
Reluctantly Indy takes up the challenge and still being young he thinks about the money that would be involved in finding the precious rock.
Unbeknown to Indy and his two followers, what awaits them is a Temple of devil worship and torture, lead by a man who has seemingly superhuman powers and strength.

The second movie (though based before the first) is a Marmite question for Indy fans. You either like it or hate it.
Personally, I loved it just as much as the first, though unlike the first movie, this one does have faults.

It’s not much of a story compared to Raiders, it feels quite simplistic with the writing. There is a story there and some elements of mystery too, it’s just a simple ABC-123 set of events.

The characters in the movie have been written with a touch more comedy too rather than finding real life comedy in their predicaments.

The movie also, is a lot darker than its predecessor with the subject matter. I didn’t mind too much, it makes it stand out from the others.

The action and effects of the movie are again, very well choreographed and put together. It’s exciting and keeps the viewer on the edge of their seat.
The acting, once again, is wonderfully played.

This time round there a touch of comic relief with Indy’s little helper Shorty Round. Key Huy Quan is brilliantly streetwise and also naïve at times in the sequence of strange events. He’s also brave and tough when called for.
Kate Capshaw as the spoilt brat Willie Scott, is another touch of comedy relief. She tends to become funnier in times of danger and when she’s in situations involving the outdoors, dirt and broken nails. Capshaw plays the role perfectly.

All in all, apart from the simple story, it’s another rollercoaster (ahem) of adventure and discovery.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:05 PM

Indiana Jones: The Last Crusade

Set after the first movie, Indy is called into action again as the Nazis are on the hunt for more Christian antiquities. This time their after the Holy Grail, aka; The Cup Of Christ, and Indy has discovered that his father, Professor Henry Jones, a man who is the world’s leading expert on the Grail, has gone missing while trying to stop the Nazis.
Indy takes along Marcus Brody, a fellow schoolteacher and friend of his father and Dr Elsa Schneider, an Austrian Art Professor who had worked alongside Indy’s father when he went missing.
With a race against time for his father’s life and a race for the Grail, Indy will once again be thrown into a world of discovery and mythology in a bid to save mankind.

The third of the series is a fantastic return to the Indy that made the first so successful. It’s fantastically written and has many subtle levels of mystery and mythology. The mystery of the Grail is discovered throughout the story through Indy’s father’s teachings and is extremely well revealed over the running time.

The little twists and turns throughout the film are also well conceived.

The action scenes are again, choreographed with perfection. They’re exciting and explosive and again, are kept to being practical throughout the movie rather than outlandish effects.

The acting is by far the best of all three movies. Sean Connery as Professor Jones is an absolute mark of genius from the filmmakers. Connery, (even though he was James Bond) and Denholm Elliot as Marcus Brody, seem so out of their element as the stay-in-the-classroom Professors it actually gives them a loveability and a sense of comedic timing. The acting is bang on in their roles too.
John Rhys-Davis as Sallah returns from the first film as Indy’s cohort and friend and is gladly expanded as a character rather than a bit-part from the first film.
Alison Doody as Indy’s new love interest, Dr Schneider, is brilliantly sexy and has an untrustworthy edge about her.

All in all it’s a brilliant return to the Indy everyone loves and has more to it than the first movie too.
My rating 100%

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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:06 PM

Indiana Jones: The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull

An ageing Dr Jones finds himself kidnapped by the Russian Military in 1957, in a bid to find an artefact that contains a great power. They wish to harness this power and rule the earth from beyond the constraints of modern technology.
Tagging along is a young man calling himself Mutt Williams, who claims that his mother and a mutual friend call Harold ‘Ox’ Oxley have also, been kidnapped by the Russians.
It’s up to Indy and Mutt to save their mutual friend and Mutt’s mother and stop the Russians from gaining a power greater than anything known in this world.

Sadly, it’s very hard to find anything good in this film.

The writing is extremely substandard and linear. There’s very little in the way of exciting action or any kind of mystery or mythology.
It feels extremely rushed, cashed in and very, very cheap.
A little twist in the Indy Legacy is in there, but it feels more of a gimmick rather than anything else.

A lot of the ideas used in the film are unused ideas from other Lucas and Spielberg collaberations, including the now infamous Nuking The Fridge scene.

The subject matter too is by far the worst part of it all. The filmmakers seem to have forgotten what Indy was all about. The 1930s TV series adventure. Ok the movie is now set in 1957, but the aura of Indy has been stamped on and left for dead.

The actors too are simply going through the motions as their characters. Ford as Indy seems kind of lost with it all, wondering why the hell he’s doing this.
A returning Karen Allen could have been a nice touch, but she too is extremely wooden.
Shia LeBeouf is a huge mistake. He delivers his lines like a robot and certainly doesn’t have the physique for the role he’s been cast into. He also tends to just flare his nostrils and look on with wide eyes when something remotely interesting happens.
By far the best part of the film is Cate Blanchett as the villainess Soviet Agent Irina Spalko. She revels in her role and never misses a beat and she’s certainly got an air of danger about her though she's still not perfect and seems also to be wondering why she's there.

As for the effects, Spielberg seems to have gone for full on CGI rather than practical effects and it’s not good CGI either. I’m afraid swinging through the jungle with CGI monkeys was completely lost on me.
CGI is used even when there’s no action on screen either, the entire movie feels hollow because of it.

All in all it’s a good job this wasn’t the first Indy movie. If it had been, it would have killed the franchise 30 years ago. My rating 1%, solely for Blanchett’s performance

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)
0.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:09 PM

Spider-Man (2002)

Peter Parker, a nerdy, bullied schoolboy is bitten on the hand by a genetically enhanced super spider while on a school outing at a science lab. After a night of illness, he awakens the next morning to find he has strange new powers that allow him to jump far and crawl up walls and a strange marks on his wrists that allow him to squirt a web-like substance.
After a car-jacking incident takes the life of a family member, he vows to use his new powers to make sure the tragedy that he has suffered, never happens to anyone else again.
Designing himself a suit, he becomes the all-powerful Spider-Man.
Unknown to him, what will become his most well known enemy, the Green Goblin, has also been born in a lab experiment gone wrong. Goblin’s goal is to wipe out all threats to his company Oscorp, and becomes a danger to the city in the process.

Raimi’s movie is an absolute joy. Though grand in feel, it’s relatively low-key and short-but-sweet with a lot of the action but utilises the look and feel of a comic book brilliantly.

It’s written perfectly too, the scene placement and storyline is wonderfully put together. The audience are given time to actually care about the characters too.
The love story between Peter and Mary-Jane Watson is worked on too, which is a nice sub story to care about.

The special effects are the absolute highlight of the film. The movie is very heavy on CGI. There are one or two glitches here and there but seeing Spidey swing through the streets of New York is a thrill-ride. It’s fast, exhilarating and colourful and is extremely well rendered.
The action scenes, though short at times, are lots of fun.

Toby Maguire as Parker/Spidey is a perfect choice for the role. Maguire took the role seriously enough to physically train as hard as he did and has the perfect physique for the Web-Slinger and acts the role overall, brilliantly. He has the cheeky, self-assured Spidey down to a T.
Willem Dafoe as Norman Osborn/Green Goblin is a joy to watch. He goes from normal guy to extremely evil, to comic book campy with absolute ease.
James Franco as Harry Osborn, Norman’s son and Peter’s best pal is good, but the role, apart from the half attempt at a love triangle, is barely expanded to more than a sub character.
J.K Simmons as Daily Bugle editor J Jonah Jameson is by far the most memorable of the characters. He absolutely smashes the role, he feels just like he’s stepped out of the comic. For me, he steals the movie when on screen.

Sadly though, the movie feels a little bare and empty for a Spider-Man film. It could do with more smash-em-up action in the mix.

All in all it’s a fun ride, lots of comic book fun and very colourful.
My rating 85%

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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:09 PM

Spider-Man 2 (2004)

Peter Parker has settled into his dual role as Peter/Spidey. The problem is that he’s settled too much. His college work and job are suffering and he’s running the risk of getting fired and flunking his studies.
Adding to that, his social life has tumbled and Mary-Jane is marrying another man.
With all the stress in his life, his powers have started to fail him.
A brilliant scientist, Dr Octavius meanwhile, has pioneered a new powerful form of energy through his research at Oscorp (now owned by James Franco’s character, Harry). Through a freak accident, Octavius’ Artificial Intelligent mechanical arms, (used for physically handling the energy), are welded to his spine and the A.I begins to control him. Spurned on by his love of his work, Octavius becomes a reckless danger to everyone in the city, with only one goal, personal gain. Harry, who blames Spider-Man for his father’s death, decides to use Octavius’ new power to kill Spidey in return for funding Octavius’ energy research. Unknown to Harry though, is that Spidey is his best pal, Peter.

Raimi’s sequel is a much grander thrill ride of effects and story writing. The legend of Spider-Man and his trials and tribulations is expanded massively throughout the movie. The story between him and Mary-Jane is worked on extensively too and also with Spidey’s relation to Harry.

It’s brilliantly put together on the story telling front.

The effects of the movie are also expanded and improved massively. The CGI action is bigger, louder and feels more like the comic book has jumped from the page.
The action itself is much grander in scale too rather than in short bursts.
The acting again is bang on the money. Maguire is given much more range with the tormented Peter/Spider-Man.

Kirsten Dunst and James Franco also are given more screen time and broader storylines.
Alfred Molina is another example of great acting, he really shines in his role as Octavius/Doc Ock. You can tell he’s enjoying every moment.
J.K Simmons steals the show again though when he’s on screen.

All in all a vast improvement on an already great start from Raimi, it’s grand and exciting.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:11 PM

Spider-Man 3 (2007)

Peter and Mary-Jane are now together in a rocky relationship. Peter’s dual life has taken it’s toll on their love-life and Mary-Jane has started to wonder if it’s all a mistake.
Harry, now knowing who and what Peter is, has undertaken the same research that nearly killed his father, Norman. He now has the mindset and powers to take out Spidey once and for all. However, Harry, now the new Green Goblin, is injured badly when he takes on Spidey and loses his memory.
Flint Marko, a runaway criminal (who is trapped in a particle accelerator and transformed at a molecular level into the Sandman), tangles with Spidey alongside Venom, an all-powerful, malevolent alien life-form that Spidey has been using for extra powers, in place of his normal Spider-Man suit.
Venom eventually finds its way to another host called Eddie Brock Jr, after Spidey realises it’s making him do bad things. Eddie has a vendetta against Peter for showing him up as a fraud at the Daily Bugle and uses his new found powers in Venom to take Spidey and Peter out.
Adding to the mix is some confusion about Uncle Ben’s death from the first movie, throwing into doubt Peter’s actions.

The story should work, it’s expanded, not greatly but it is expanded and the characters are all thrown into personal and interpersonal battles and the addition of the new villains should make for a broad plot.

Sadly though, it feels more like a rushed cash in to the first two gems.
The new love circle between Peter, Mary-Jane, Harry, Gwen Stacy and Eddie is another expansion, but again, it falls flat. You just don’t care if they work it all out or not. To be honest, neither do the actors.

The CGI in this film isn’t brilliantly improved. Some of it is very cartoony. By far the best thing in the CGI stakes is Sandman but the budget for the effects seems to have been spent solely on him, with the rest having to make do.

The action though I will say, is fast and exciting. Some of it is a little gimmicky but the end fight between Spider-Man, Green Goblin, Sandman and Venom is particularly good.

The one other good thing about the movie as a whole, is that it delves into a darker feel than the first two, but it’s just not enough when everything else is missing the mark.

The acting, sadly, has suffered also.
Maguire is his usual self in the role, but the addition of a bad attitude when he dons the black suit just isn’t Maguire’s forte.
Dunst is starting to look fed up with it all.
Bryce Dallas Howard as Gwen Stacy is a breath of fresh air. She's absolutely beautiful and plays the role with a tongue in cheek flirtiness.
Topher Grace and Thomas Hayden Church as Venom and Sandman respectively, are good in their roles. Grace in particular is slimy and evil.
Franco is a highlight as Goblin Jr. You can tell he’s enjoying his part as a real bad guy and hits his mark really well after his character’s memory loss.

All in all a sad ending to a terrific build up. Though it’s watchable, it most definitely should have been better.
My rating 45%

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)
2.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:12 PM

Rocky

Rocky Balboa, a down on his luck amateur boxer and debt collector for mobsters is given a shot at the big-time when he’s approached by the managers of the current World Heavy Weight Champion, Apollo Creed, in a bout for the title.
Creed and his managers see it as a publicity opportunity, never for a second believing that an unfit amateur slugger can stand up to a chiselled athlete like Creed.
Rocky on the other hand, takes it more seriously than they imagined and, with the woman of his dreams now on his arm, he trains harder than he’s ever trained before, for the fight of his life.

Stallone’s writing is pretty simlistic, but it works tremendously. His underdog story is an absolute masterpiece in simplicity. Keeping in mind he wrote the movie’s plot in a few minutes, it’s stood the test of time brilliantly.

The character development is very subtly written and played out over the running time of the film. Adrienne’s development and Rocky’s maturity growing over the film together is brilliantly conceived with the love story between Rocky and Adrienne, with Adrienne coming out of her shell through Rocky’s outgoing nature and eventually becoming a rock for him in return when he doubts his fighting ability.

The audience is also given time to really care for the characters too, it’s not just a punch ‘em up boxing movie.

The ending fight scenes aren’t perfectly put together but they work with the tone of the overall film.

The acting too is absolutely fantastic.
Stallone as Rocky is great. By far Sly’s best performance in any movie. His natural slurred speech and almost simpleton mannerisms are perfect for a punch drunk never-has-been. Though being a fighter, his sweet nature and humanity really makes you care about him too.
Talia Shire as Adrienne is another fantastic role played to perfection. She physically transforms over the movie as the character comes out of her shell.
Carl Weathers encapsulates Apollo Creed brilliantly too. A mediocre actor at best, this is another top performance. He’s loud, proud, brash and confident and fits Creed’s persona perfectly.

Stealing the show though, is the late and very great Meredith Burgess as Rocky’s manager and Trainer, Mickey. Burgess as always never misses a beat and though he’s a tough, rough ex-fighter, he has a human, fatherly side to him that really gives Rocky what he needs.

All in all it’s a brilliant, well acted and original sports-drama and has heartfelt action at the end.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:13 PM

Rocky 2

Rocky and Adrienne have now gotten married and are using the money and fame Rocky made to pay for better accommodation and a better life.
Adrienne has also fallen pregnant and a lack of money is starting to weigh on Rocky’s mind. Maybe one more fight can sort out their financial problems.
Creed has also decided that he wants a rematch with Rocky. Creed believes that their first encounter, with Rocky going the distance, was basically luck on Rocky’s behalf.
Adding to his problems is that his right eye has been damaged, making him almost blind on one side. Mickey has told him that if he fights Creed again, he’ll be going it alone as he doesn’t want to be responsible for sending Rocky blind. Adrienne too, is weary of Rocky fighting again.
With all this troubling Rocky, Creed makes a public embarrassment of him and after a family upset, Adrienne makes a turn around and eventually gives her praise for him to take on the Champ again.
With an angry Mickey by his side, Rocky takes up the challenge.

Some say the movie is a re-run of the first but Stallone’s writing has allowed for expansion for the characters.
Their attitudes are the same from the first film, Rocky is tough but human and Adrienne is still breaking through her shell in some areas, but their storylines are pushed into new and occasionally upsetting directions.
There’s definitely more of a drama sense with the film.

One thing that pulls on the viewer though is that it’s very downbeat, there’s too much bad stuff going on in Rocky’s life.

The fight scenes are happily an improvement in the movie.

The acting is also improved from all parties. They seem comfortable in their roles and carry the characters extremely well.
Burt Young as Paulie, Rocky’s brother-in-law, is expanded within the story too. He plays the part of the drunken waster brilliantly.

All in all it’s certainly on a par with the first movie, improved in a few ways too but lacks the originality of the first.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:13 PM

Rocky 3

Rocky has now become a megastar in the boxing world. He’s been top of the Heavyweight Division for a while and has decided that he would like to retire on a high note. Much to Adrienne’s delight as she gets worried every time he fights.
A young boxer called Clubber Lang has other ideas. He wants Rocky’s title and challenges him to a fight, insulting Adrienne at a press conference too, causing confusion and anger for Rocky.
Adrienne is less than happy with the idea though. Though Rocky has become a celebrity in his home neighbourhood, she feels as though Rocky hasn’t got anything left to prove, she also tells him that there’s no way that he can beat Lang as he’s too strong.
Sadly for Rocky, a tragedy occurs at ringside when he fights Lang, which causes Rocky to lose the fight and his title to a far superior and incredibly dangerous fighter.
Seeing an opportunity, Creed reappears and offers training to Rocky. A dubious and broken Rocky, takes up the offer and with Adrienne lending her support too, he trains harder than he’s ever done before, for an even harder fight of his life.

This third instalment is a chalk and cheese film for fans. The writing is about as good as it could have been but it feels as though the filmmakers are clutching at straws to keep the legend alive.

There are a few new original ideas going on with Rocky losing and having to make a comeback and a couple of little twists with who Rocky can and can’t trust anymore but that’s about it.

The fight scenes and training montages are well choreographed though. They’re far better than the first two movies.

The acting too is about as good as it could be, the lead roles in Stallone, Shire and Weathers are the same, but Mr T as Clubber Lang, sadly, is extremely wooden.
I’m a fan of Mr T but in Rock 3, he really does stink.

All in all it’s a more stylish take than the first two, with invincible enemies and new training regimes and has a few twist here and there and though it’s enjoyable, it’s a hollow shell compared to the originals, though personally, I enjoyed it.
My rating 75%

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)
4

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:14 PM

Rocky 4

A new upcoming Russian super-athlete called Ivan Drago, has surfaced in America and his managers have been pressing for him to fight America’s best. Apollo Creed decides to come out of retirement with Rocky as his manager and takes on the Russian man-mountain with horrific consequences.
Spurned on by guilt over Apollo’s death, Rocky heads for Russia with Apollo’s old manager and Paulie and Adrienne by his side to take on Drago in a revenge match and to show the Russian super-fighter how it’s done, his way.

That’s about it really for the story, it’s incredibly simplistic like the first film, but contains much less in the way of drama or character development.

The filmmakers also decided to go for full on 1980s gimmicks too, talking robots, Russian paranoia, another indestructible enemy, enemies can love one another too etc.

What makes the movie stand out though is the ending fight between Rocky and Drago. It’s brilliantly choreographed and edited (if extremely cheesy at the end) and really gets the viewer on the edge of their seat.

The acting again is the same as usual, Dolph Lundgren, who made it to #34 in my top 40 villains is fantastically athletic and really looks the part. His acting isn’t the best but he’s kept quiet most of the time. The fact that Stallone and Weathers both were nearly killed by Lundgren during fight scenes, really speaks for his part in the film.

All in all a more bash ‘em up action orientated boxing movie but is extremely cheesy at times, though it stands out amongst the others.
My rating 80%

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)
4

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:15 PM

Rocky 5

After Rocky’s bout with Drago, he discovers that he’s been hit with the thing all boxers fear, brain damage.
To make things worse, Paulie has squandered the family’s fortune and they find themselves back in their old crummy neighbourhood again.
Having to forcibly retire from his beloved sport, he takes on Mickey’s old gym and finds himself a protege in a young, street urchin fighter called Tommy Gunn.
In the process, Rocky’s relationship to his young son is put in jeopardy as he spends more and more time training Gunn.
With a new found fame, Gunn turns his back on Rocky’s teachings and management, in favour of a hollow lifestyle full of flash cars and lots of money. Eventually Gunn hits the big time and earns his Heavyweight title but is slammed by the newspapers for what he did to Rocky.
In a fit of rage, Gunn attacks Paulie in a bar while the TV cameras are rolling, forcing Rocky into one more punch up, this time against his ex-student.

Again, it’s a simplistic story, but it works with the little twist that’s added between Rocky and his son. The drama and heartache Rocky feels with the relationship between him and Tommy Gunn is worked on well too.

Apart from that that’s all there really is to say.

The acting seems to have dropped in calibre as well. Stallone and Shire do there best to keep up appearances but they look bored with it all.
Stallone’s real life son, Sage Stallone as Robert (Rocky Jr) was a nice touch and he carries his role really quite well for a young actor.

Sadly, the new villain in Tommy Morrison playing Tommy Gunn wasn’t much of a great choice. He can box really well, Morrison is a real boxer, but he certainly can’t act.

All in all, it’s a sad, low key ending to something that was already starting to falter. The story could and should have been much, much better played out.
My rating is a mid 50%

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)
2.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:15 PM

Rocky Balboa

Rocky, now a retired boxer in his late 50s and widower after Adrienne’s death, is running a small Italian Restaurant in Philadelphia. His relationship with his son is failing too, they hardly speak and Robert feels his father’s fame is too much of a shadow.
A computer-simulated match between Rocky in his prime, and the current Heavyweight Champion, Mason Dixon, is shown on TV, and Rocky wins the simulated fight.
A slightly disturbed and curious Rocky decides to take a battery of tests to see if he can still fight professionally.
On hearing that Rocky has passed the tests, Dixon’s manager approaches Rocky with the offer of making the computer fight a reality and lots of money to go with it.
Initially, a reluctant Rocky is spurned on a new by found Little Marie (seen as a child in Rocky 1) and eventually his son too.
He takes up the reigns in the training room with Apollo’s old manager again and trains himself up to take on another life time challenge and get rid of the Inner-Demons that have haunted him for nearly 20 years.

Again, another simple plot for the Rocky franchise is smothered with sentimentality. However this time round, it’s a welcome return to the ring for fans of Balboa.
It’s very well put together in writing terms and feels almost nostalgic with the way it’s edited. There are also many subtle levels of story telling within the plot too and character development is forefront in the plot.

The gimmicky feel of Rocky 3, 4 & 5 has also been dropped.

The fight scenes are also a really well made piece of choreography.
Stallone and Antonio Tarver really trade punches in the fight too, which caused a nightmare for the injury-continuity team.

The training montage is another highlight, it’s really encouraging to see Rocky do his thing with such a determination.

The acting is another improvement in the franchise. Stallone is back on form as the Rocky we all know and love and is a little older and wiser too.

The biggest surprise in the acting is real life boxer Antonio Tarver as Mason Dixon. He’s not on screen a great deal in the acting stakes but he really makes an impression as the headstrong, arrogant fighter.

All in all it’s a really welcome return to the Rocky everyone loves and doesn’t pull any punches (ahem) with sentimentality.
My rating is up there with the originals at 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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:17 PM

The Lost Boys

Two brothers, Sam and Michael, move to Santa Carla with their Mother to live at the Grandfather’s home after their Mother and Father have divorced.
Stories from their Grandfather about Santa Carla being the Murder Capital Of The World, spark Sam and Michael’s imaginations.
Within a few days in their new surroundings, Sam makes an impression on two comic book storeowners know as the Frog brothers. They tell Sam stories of vampires in Santa Carla and try to push him into reading horror comics, saying that they’re more like survival manuals. Sam of course, laughs it off and accuses them of sniffing too much ink.
In the meantime, through a girl calling herself Star, Michael makes friends with a group of young leather-clad bikers lead by a young man called David, and they introduce him to their hideout. While there, they tease him with what appears to be hallucinations and give him some red wine to drink.
For the following few days after, Sam notices Michael is behaving abnormally and begins suspecting that the Frog brothers were telling the truth. In a brotherly confrontation, Sam brings a sudden realisation to Michael that all may not be right and a meeting between Michael and the group of bikers brings Michael’s worst fears to a horrific reality.

It’s a fantastic story of redemption, soul searching/saving and family ties and is wonderfully written with comedy-horror in mind. The subject matters of the movie are at times quite disturbing too, there are some genuinely scary and gory bits thrown in for good measure. The comedy tends to come from the situations that the young trio (the Frogs and Sam) find themselves in.
There's also a nice, well concieved twist at the end.
The dialogue is also brilliantly placed and played by the cast.

The effects are also a wonder, they’re practical and gritty and have shaped the look of pretty much all vampire movies since. There is only one, partial green screen effect in the entire film and you can’t even see it it’s that well covered.

The acting is another bonus. Most of the cast are young, sexy and very 80s.
Corey Haim as Sam is brilliantly naïve and has a wonderful, concerned kid brother feel about him and he carries the comedy and horror elements with style.
Corey Feldman and Jamison Newlander are great as the Frogs. They’re young wannabe-commandos with a strangely competent air about them, and show signs of naivety too in the strange situations.
Jason Patric is another great choice as Michael. In the words of Joel Schumacher, ‘he has a wonderful big brother element about him’, he also plays the role with a great intensity.

By far the best of the cast is a young Kiefer Sutherland as David. He’s barely on screen and yet he makes a massive impression on the story and on the viewer. It’s by far his most memorable role.

The soundtrack is haunting at times and also very 80s in the style.

Maybe one bad thing about the film is the running time. I’ve said this about movies before but you don’t want The Lost Boys to end, it’s that good.

All in all, for me it’s the best vampire movie made to date and wrote the rulebook for most vampire movies since. An 80s classic.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:19 PM

Alien

Set aboard the spaceship Nostromo, the crew are woken from hypersleep due to a starnge Alien signal coming from a nearby planet. Due to Company contracts, they’re obliged to check it out.
On landing on the planet, three of the crew head out into the unknown and discover a crashed ship, filled with hundreds of two-foot tall eggs. When one of the eggs hatches, it releases a strange organism that attaches itself to one of the trio’s face and sends him into a coma.
The other two drag him back to the landing craft, unknowingly placing the rest of the crew in mortal danger.

Ridley Scott’s sci-fi horror is an original masterpiece. It combines the two elements absolutely perfectly, adding to the mix genuine dread and fear, wonder, imagination, mystery and claustrophobia too.

It’s also extremely well written in terms of character, universe and dialogue.
Inspired by Lucas’ Star Wars, Scott built a future full of dirty, grimy and well used surroundings and characters that are real and ordinarily original.
He also added a few twists to the overall story telling with original ideas on certain characters and heroes.

The acting is another bonus.
The entire cast is absolutely spot on with their characters. They’re real in their surroundings and various roles throughout the ship and in the series of terrifying situations.

The creature also is an extremely original piece of design by H.R Giger. Though it falters slightly as the man-in-suit costume, it’s still something that captures the imagination and has lived in movie history for the nearly 4 decades.

All in all it’s a brilliantly original movie that has shaped the sci-fi horror movie world since its creation.
My rating 100%

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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:19 PM

Aliens

Set years after the first movie, Ripley has woken from hypersleep to find that the world she knew has vanished. Surrounded by company officials and investigations, she’s ridiculed for the stories she tells about what happened on the Nostromo years before.
It’s revealed to her that the planet she described has now become part of a terraforming project and that contact has been lost with the colonists.
With a squad of Interplanetary Marines by her side, she’s sent out to the original planet as an advisor for the squad where she faces the possibility of more horror and has to face her fears that have haunted her for as long as she can remember.

James Cameron’s sequel to Scott’s masterpiece has it’s fair share of shocks and claustrophobia and borders on the horror genre but is much more action orientated than the original sci-fi horror.

It’s also just as well written too. It expands the universe that Scott created too. There’s more scope with the horizon of the storyline and there are new characters and an expansion in the ‘Company’ added in as well.

The acting again is bang on the money.
Sigourney Weaver as Ripley is expanded from the tough officer type to that of a mentally tormented, reluctant heroine. Eventually digging deep to do what’s needed. Weaver was nominated for an Oscar in the role too.
Michael Biehn is spot on as Corporal Hicks. He’s tough and take-charge and has a very approachable human quality about him too.
The Marines are primarily made up of stunt actors too, which adds to the authenticity of their roles.

The effects, especially the creatures are improved as well for the movie. Cameron, having a background in special effects, had the knowledge to use camera angles and wire work for the creatures, which expands their character brilliantly and he has a nice twist with the Alien lifecycle. The action is fantastically choreographed too.

All in all it takes a different approach to the original and is the rare exception where the sequel is as good as the first.
My rating is another 100%

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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:21 PM

Alien 3

A movie hit with budget cuts, internal arguments between producers, director and writers, storyline changes (before during and even after filming) and studio executives having no leniency or confidence with director David Fincher.

The story, set just after James Cameron's Aliens, involves Ripley (Sigourney Weaver) crash landing on an almost abandoned planet with an enormous yet run down and barely populated prison after her cryo-tube is ejected from the Sulaco mothership.

The usual happens, an Alien Facehugger follows her in the Emergency Evacuation Unit and eventually spawns an offspring, which disappears into the prison.

At first, as usual, Ripley's magical tale of giant aliens with acidic blood and a mouth for a tongue is ignored by the powers that be (the prison super-intendant and his second in command). The Alien eventually runs amuck, sending the prisoners and the prison staff into fits of panic by picking them off one by one.
Ripley eventually is looked to for help in fighting the creature while they all await a rescue ship from 'The Company'.

Theatrical Version:

The theatrical release of the movie is the version most people are familiar with. The Alien gestates inside of a dog that belongs to one of the prisoners.
This version contains a limited storyline as it was cut and shredded in the editing room against Fincher's wishes. It's also a good 30 minutes shorter.

It also contains limited interaction between the viewer and the actors/characters, many of the prisoners are nameless faces treated like cannon fodder for the Alien.

Only a handful of characters are expanded on for the viewer: Ripley, Dr Clemens (Charles Dance), Dillon (Charles S Dutton), Morse (Danny Webb) and Aaron '85' (Ralph Brown) and that's about it.

The Alien, gladly is kept to the shadows as much as possible and many of the attack scenes are shot relatively close up to put the viewer in the midst of the action. Which works to an extent but can get disorientating.
The prison also is kept almost as secret as the nameless prisoners. The viewer never really feels part of the setting. Giant corridors that all look the same make the audience just as lost as the storyline.

Ok, the theatrical release is a marmite movie for fans, they either love it or hate it.
I'd say that it works as a horror and is a good film in its own right, but it feels unfinished and rushed. I didn't like it at first, but over the years, it grew on me.

Extended Cut:

Now we're talking.
Fincher was put to making two similar beginnings to the movie, the theatrical version being the one the studio wanted, this 'definitive' edition being Fincher's preferred.
The dog in the theatrical version is never seen in this version, instead, an ox (used as a tractor by the prisoners) is the Facehugger's choice of gestation.

The story is expanded between the audience and pretty much all the characters, especially Golic (played by Paul McGann), a psychotic murderer and rapist who actually sympathises with the alien creature.
Most of the nameless prisoners now have speaking lines and the storyline feels much more finished and that more time has actually been taken in making it work.

A huge chunk of the middle of the film contains the same scenes as the theatrical release but with the extra/original scenes added back in, it gives the entire movie a completely different aura.

The bad point of the Definitive Version is also, sadly, the added scenes.

That might seem contradictory but the problem is this; The sound hasn't been looped in an editing room, which gives the added scenes a 'hissy' background sound. Some of the added original scenes are fine, others not so.

It's a shame really, as the Definitive Edition is by far a superior movie.

Though if you can look past the small sound problem, even if you didn't like the theatrical Alien 3, you'll certainly prefer this one.

Give it a go. I did, and even though I like the theatrical version, I'll never be going back to it now.

Overall Theatrical Version rating: 75%.
Overall Definitive Version rating: 90% (would be 95%, just the sound lets it down)

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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:21 PM

Alien Resurrection

The USM Auriga, a military ship has, after 200 years, managed to clone Ripley and the Alien Queen. Their goal is to use the Alien as an ultimate weapon.
In the cloning process, Ripley’s and the Alien’s DNA have been crossed at a genetic level, giving Ripley a superhuman strength.
After the creatures escape from their cells and the military personnel on board the ship are either killed or escape, it’s up to Ripley and a small group of survivors, mainly space pirates, to get off the ship and destroy the Auriga before it can land on Earth.

Sadly, after a great build up and the marmite question of Alien 3, the fans of the franchise were hit with this abomination.

It’s very stylish and contemporary in the way it looks and in the character design but the writing, particularly the dialogue is mediocre at best.
There are little original twists in the story and some of the characters and creatures but they feel more gimmicky than anything else and there’s a lot of very samey plotlines going on too.

The acting is also extremely hammy and borders on wooden at times, especially Winona Ryder.
Weaver is about as good as she could have been but looks fed up with it all.
The best of the acting comes from Ron Perlman, he encapsulates his thug of a character brilliantly and adds a touch of loud humour too.

The action is very stylish rather than realistic and doesn’t really excite the viewer. Coming from a French director I guess that’s expected but it does make the film stand out from the others. The underwater scene is by far the most memorable scene of the entire film.
The creature effects are relatively good and the CGI is well rendered.

All in all, it has a very stylised feel and look and is mainly a miss affair, but it’s watchable for post-pub entertainment.
My rating 40%

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)
2

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:23 PM

The Lost Word: Jurassic Park

The premise is based on secrets kept by the Ingen company. There is a second island with dinosaurs on and Hammond has decided to send in a team of scientists to research how they have managed to live for so long without the injections needed for survival.
Ian Malcolm has been drafted in unwillingly as his girlfriend Sarah Harding has been sent to the island ahead of schedule, alone.
Cue lots of running and screaming.
　
It’s another marmite movie from me, the fans of the original film were divided with this one.
As it is, it’s a decent movie, the filmmakers approached the idea with the mindset of "we’ve achieved the impossible with JP, now how far can we push it".
It really shows too, it’s louder, faster, has more dino’s and has far better special effects.

The action is by far the best thing about the movie, it’s very exciting and fantastically choreographed. The cliff top T-Rex scene is certainly a heart stopper.

The downside is that the story has suffered. It feels as though Spielberg felt obliged to make a sequel and, though he resorted to Crichton’s books again, it feels kind of hollow and rushed. Not cashed-in exactly, but certainly empty of story.
There are nice little touches throughout the film, for example with the T-Rex, and some of the action sequences, but again, Crichton’s masterpieces of storytelling have been torn apart again.

The acting is good though. Jeff Goldblum reprises his role as Malcolm, he hits the nail right on the head.
Julianne Moore as Harding is another good point, she very likable.
The late great Pete Postlethwaite makes an appearance as a Great White Hunter and though he’s only around for about a half of the movie, he makes a lasting impression.

A marmite point for fans is the second act of the film, some loved it, others not so. Personally I though it was an original touch.

All in all it’s a thrill ride of effects and action but lacks the charm and mystery of the first.
My rating 65%
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)
3.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:24 PM

Jurassic Park 3

The premise, is that thrill seekers are using the second island (from the second film) as an adventure holiday sort of thing. Ben Hildebrand and his stepson Erik Kirby vanish when their parasailing trip goes wrong and they land on the island.
Erik’s mother and father (Tea Leoni and William H Macy) kidnap Alan Grant (a returning Sam Neill) and his assistant Billy (Alessandro Nivola) and take 3 mercenaries with them too, to the island in search of their son.
Again, cue lots of running and screaming and dino’s.

This is certainly the first and final nail in JP’s coffin. It was an anticipated movie by fans but sadly detaches itself from the JP universe almost completely. The only exception being Sam Neill and a 30-second cameo from Laura Dern. It’s also written without any input from Crichton, which really shows in the extremely poor storytelling.

The filmmakers try to add a broken family trying to fix their problems into the mix, but it falls flat, you just don’t care about the characters enough and the ending is so abrupt and unrealistic it smashes any hopes that the film may have had.

There are more Dinosaurs shown throughout the movie and the Raptors in particular have been updated to modern scientific fact, but sadly that’s the only good point, and sadly again, it pushes the movie even farther from the JP universe with continuity errors. The addition of a new super-predator could have been worth while but it comes off as a cheap, badly animated gimmick.

It’s kind of a double barrel; the good points are actually a bad point.
The island and buildings seen on the island also bare absolutely no resemblance to the second movie either.

The effects are another bad point, the creatures seen are extremely animated.
When I say animated, what I actually mean is that they look like cartoons.

Getting Joe Johnson to try to live up to Spielberg's calibre, was certainly a bad choice by the studios, it’s simply an extremely poor film compared to Spielberg's lead up.

Sam Neill looks absolutely tired of it all.
William H Macy and Tea Leoni aren’t too bad, but their comedic ‘divorcee differences’ don’t do much to lift the story.

All in all, it’s a miss so big it wouldn’t get wet if it fell out of a boat.
My rating 10%

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)
0.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:26 PM

Gremlins

A failing inventor called Randall Peltzer is searching through Chinatown in search for a Christmas present for his son, Billy.
While there he’s taken to a small shop by a boy where he finds that the boy’s Grandfather has a small animal in a cage.
Besotted by the little creature, he offers to buy it, the old man refuses saying there is a lot of responsibility with it.
In secret, Randall and the young boy make a deal for the little animal and the boy explains that there are rules that need to be followed with caring for it.
Don’t get him wet. Don’t ever feed him after midnight. Don’t expose him to bright light, especially sunlight, as it will kill him.
On returning home, he gives Billy his present, now named Gizmo and within a few days, Billy breaks the first two rules and unleashes a an army of evil, malignant little creatures on his home town.
It’s up to him and his girlfriend and Gizmo to stop the little monsters before they end up spreading beyond control.

It’s a pretty simplistic story and sets itself up quite easily for the viewer, but the concept as a whole is very original.
Joe Dante’s direction is another bonus, he really creates an atmospheric set of circumstances and keeps the mystery of the creatures going throughout. There are also some jumpy moments mixed in as well.

Though the movie is seen as a big hit with kids by modern standard, at the time of release though, some cinemas actually banned it and warnings had to be aired to TV during trailers, warning people not to take their kids to see it. Gremlins is more of a comedy-horror than anything else, but humour is very dark at times and borders throughout on macabre and sadistic too.
It also contains some quite violent scenes, particularly the attempted killings of innocent people.

The effects are also a bonus. Using mainly hand puppets for the creatures they have a very real organic feel to them and they’re brilliantly modelled.
There is one stop motion scene as well, but it’s really well put together.

The acting is again, a good point. The actors play it relatively serious throughout, which makes some of the comedy work better.
Zach Galligan as Billy is a brilliantly nerdy, normal guy thrown into horrific circumstances.
Phoebe Cates as Kate Beringer is another normal character who has to dig deep during the horror.

A bad point is that some of the story telling is really very simple and set up in an ABC-123 set of scenes. Though, it’s not much of a downer as the film as a whole is really well made.

All in all, it’s a funny, if dark movie that has proved its worth over the past 30 years.
My rating 85%

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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:26 PM

Gremlins 2: The New Batch

After the death of Gizmo’s owner (the Grandfather from the first film), the large Clamp Corporation takes over the city block and builds a large skyscraper. Gizmo is also snatched by the company’s genetics lab and kept in a cage in the building.
As it happens, Billy and Kate are now working in said building and Billy finds out that Gizmo is there and rescues him from the lab.
Of course, Billy leaves Gizmo alone for a few hours where he ends up getting into trouble and gets wet, spawning the New Batch of the title.
Cue lots of destruction and hijinks in the skyscraper.

It’s another simplistic story from director Dante and sadly, all the dark humour and horror from the first film is dropped completely for a more friendly family film that’s suitable for kids.
The movie is a prime example of Hollywood catering for taste and wider audience, rather than for making decent films.

It’s very comic book in feel too. The filmmakers decided to go mainly for wacky comedy and funny sound effects and the movie is laden with gimmicks, especially when the creatures end up in the genetics lab and start drinking the various potions.
There are a lot of nods and homage to other films as well.

The effects are improved with the creatures though, the puppets are much better modelled but they’re very cutesy for a younger audience appeal.

The acting is a good point though.
Zach and Phoebe hit their roles perfectly again.
This time round the viewer is treated to John Glover as the Squillionaire Daniel Clamp (head of the Clamp Corporation). Glover is absolutely fantastic in the role and has a very subtle, comic book comedy about him. He's lots of fun and very enigmatic.

Another bad point of the film is that some of the soundtrack (music) is existing material from other Dante films.

All in all, it’s a big step back from the first film, but as a whole, as it is, it’s actually quite entertaining and fun to watch.
My rating 65%
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)
3.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:28 PM

Ghostbusters 2

The movie revolves around a haunted painting. The man in the picture, called Vigo, was once a medieval tyrant and sadistic magician who now wants back in the world of the living.
A river of ‘ectoplasmic’ style slime has also started building up underneath New York city
The slime its self is almost a living entity and is able to affect its surroundings by turning usually inanimate objects into living creatures, usually dangerous ones too.
Mixed up in all this is Dana Barrett again, this time though with her 8-month-old son, Oscar. Vigo wants Oscar as the vessel to harbour his soul when he returns to the living world.
It’s up to the Ghostbusters to stop Vigo and found out what exactly is causing the river of slime, and if they can utilise it in their fight to save little Oscar.

This movie is the one that divides the fans.

It’s about as well written as it could have been for a sequel to a low budget adult comedy.
The thing that lets it down is that it’s been dumbed down for a wider audience. The first film was such a big hit with kids, I guess they had to, but it gives the movie a much more held back attitude. There’s no smoking, swearing, very little in the way of spooky atmospheres and, though there are some strange happenings there’s not many scares.
It’s also very comic book, similar in tone to the cartoons that the first movie spawned.
There is one other bad point toward the end with the Statue Of Liberty scenes, it doesn’t feel quite right. I can’t quite put my finger on it but it feels out of place.

However, it’s brilliantly put together in terms of story writing and creation.
The ideas in the film are original and are utilised with style. The comedic elements are much more prominent in this one, the first film was more of an adult comedy but this sequel is much more wacky and zany and certainly more child friendly.

Even though the filmmakers were after a wider audience to capitalise on their success, they actually did a very good job. The movie doesn’t feel like a rushed, cheap, cliché cash in.

The effects are improved to an extent but they still look like the first film. I’d say this is another good point, the first film’s effects looked the way they looked because of low budget, and this film really was a style choice.
There are some changes to how the ghosts are modelled though, they’re more cartoony, kind of like Gizmo in Gremlins 2 being more cutesy than the first Gremlins.

The acting is another good point. Murray, Ramis, Hudson and Ayckroyd are brilliantly comfortable in their roles and Sigourney Weaver is also spot on as single mum Dana.
Peter MacNicol adds a touch of humour as Dr. Janosz Poha, Vigo’s unwitting sidekick.
The late Wilhelm Von Homburg as Vigo is a brilliant villain, he’s very close to stealing the show. He’s voiced by Max Von Sydow. He’s also very threatening and believable as a force to be reckoned with.

All in all, no where near as good as the first film due to the dumbed down tone but is good for keeping the kids quiet for a couple of hours. Adults will enjoy it too but most people over the age of 20 will prefer the first film.
My rating 70%
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)
3.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:30 PM

Independence Day

A huge alien craft takes orbit around Earth and drops hundreds of city sized saucers onto the Earth that take their place hovering above all of our major cities.
Called into action is USAF Pilot Will Smith and scientist Jeff Goldblum to save the day, teaming up with the US President Bill Pullman.
Hence lots of Dogfights between Smith and the alien fighters and a big finale on the alien mothership.

It’s another simplistic alien attack movie and a disaster movie to boot. Emmerich basically made his name with ID4 and he really deserves the credit.

The plot is simple, the dialogue is even more simple and the writing is even more simplistic but, the way the movie is played out on screen, mixed with absolutely top notch effects makes a perfect popcorn no-brainer effects laden disaster epic.

Emmerich’s usual stereotypes of other non-USA cultures is present again and their dialogue also hits unintentionally funny but it’s still lots of fun.
Some of the dialogue reaches cringe-worthy at times, coming close to the olde saucer-film speeches.

The CGI and miniature work is bang on the money though. The good thing with ID4 is that there are practical effects involved, rather than Hollywood’s recent attempts at all out CGI.
The aliens too are a welcome addition. They’re very well designed and really quite spooky at times.

The action is also top notch, the dogfights between alien craft and USAF fighters is really exciting.

Will Smith as USAF Pilot Hiller is at his usual, loud, fun and energetic self. He’s lots of fun and you can tell he had fun during filming.
Jeff Goldblum is another plus point. His ‘cable repairman’ and scientist David Levinson is engaging and funny and he really hits the serious notes when needed.

All in all, another no-brainer CGI laden disaster movie from Emmerich but unlike all of the others of his that I’ve reviewed on here, this one really hits all the right notes. Fun, loud, brash and needs to be watched with sugary drinks and snacks.
My rating 88%

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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:31 PM

Die Hard

The movie is based around a New York cop called John McClane who is visiting his estranged wife at her workplace in a Los Angeles skyscraper, called the Nakatomi Plaza. It’s Christmas Eve and the top employees of the company are having a Christmas party when McClane arrives.
However, a terrorist group who is after the contents of the building’s Safe has also arrived just after McClane.
Unknown to the terrorist group though, is that during the hostile party crashing, McClane’s police training has urged him to take action. He manages to disappear, unseen into the building’s air conditioning system and various lift-shafts, and has now become the only hope for the group of hostages that the terrorists have taken. Among the hostages though is McClane’s wife, Holly.

It’s an exceptionally original movie. The storyline is relatively simple: A man with a background trying to save the one he loves from a more powerful force.
But the way the movie has been handled and researched with real life police officers as advisors for Willis make for a real feeling turn of events.

The humour of the film comes from the same police advisors too. It’s very situational and makes for a good chuckle throughout.

What makes this particular action movie special is that it’s relatively small scale and only occasionally goes for the larger bangs and explosions. Most action flicks are simply crash bang and wallop all the way through. Director McTiernan manages to balance every element of the movie brilliantly.

The first and original Die Hard movie made a household name of Bruce Willis across the world.
Originally intended as a sequel to Arnold Schwarzenegger’s Commando, and sticking closely to the original source material of Roderick Thorp's novel called Nothing Lasts Forever, Die Hard is an 80s action classic and also manages to be a Christmas favourite too.

The acting is also a bonus. Willis is absolutely brilliant as the cop who’s out of his comfort zone who digs deep into his psyche to save his wife.
Alan Rickman is fantastic too as the terrorist leader. Rickman made it into my top 40 villains list.

All in all it’s one of the best action films ever made and has a delicate balance of over-the-top bangs, small-scale claustrophobia, combined with subtle humour and an actual sense of realism.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:32 PM

Die Hard 2: Die Harder

McClane is once again thrown into the firing line on Christmas Eve while waiting for his wife Holly to arrive at Washington Dulles International Airport.
Another group of terrorists has hacked the airport’s computer systems and is demanding the release of a Val Verde Dictator, or they will give wrong co-ordinates to the circling aeroplanes, which will cause them to crash. Of course, with Holly being on one of the circling aeroplanes, John has to do anything he can to bring down the terrorists, as the airport police are inadequate at best.

For a sequel, it’s about as good as it could have been. The writing is pretty cliché, it’s more of a rerun of the first movie in terms of plot but the action is certainly louder and more explosive.
Typical of the Hollywood sequel, forget about that delicate balancing act that made the first action movie so special, instead just go for all out guns and explosions.

The main thing missing is McTiernan as director, this time round it’s Renny Harlin at the helm. His repertoire contains films like The Long Kiss Goodnight, Cliffhanger and Deep Blue Sea (the shark film) so that should give you an idea of what brainless action to expect.

The acting is pretty bang on though. Willis is comfortable in the role.
William Saddler is ok as the terrorist leader but he’s very cliché like the script and doesn’t really feel much of a threat.

All in all it’s a good post pub film if nothing else is on, but feels more of a cashed in affair compared to the first film.
My rating 40%

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)
2

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:32 PM

Die Hard With A Vengeance

McClane is once again pulled into action when a terrorist group decides to start setting off bombs around New York.
This time round, the terrorist group is targeting McClane directly. It appears that at some point in McClane’s past, he has upset some pretty powerful and dangerous people who are after a double whammy of revenge against McClane and the theft of something valuable.
A ‘Good Samaritan’ shopkeeper called Zeus Carver unwittingly gets pulled into the explosive action after he saves McClane from a sure-fire beating, which gives an odd-couple-buddy-movie feel to the mix.

Die Hard makes a welcome return to the screen with this attempt. McTiernan is back at the helm thankfully and the story and plot have both been written with a little more thought than the second film had.

Ok, there are certain plots that are a little contrived and are used solely for franchise continuity, but they do work to an extent.

The action this time round is even more explosive than both predecessors combined and is much more furiously paced.
As too is the humour. It’s much louder but not wacky. A lot of the giggles that the audience gets are mixed into the furious pacing of the action.

Willis is on form again. He’s looking even more comfortable in the role and carries the action brilliantly.
Samuel L Jackson as McClane’s reluctant partner adds a brilliant touch of comedy to the mix and really knows how to play it cool and tough when needed.
Jeremy Irons as the terrorist leader is a little dodgy on the accent front, but he’s delightfully camp and theatrical.

All in all a vast improvement on the second movie and almost tops the original on an overall basis. It certainly tops the original in the action stakes though. What lets it down is the slightly cashed-in feel of the franchise continuity plotlines.
My rating 85%

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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:34 PM

Back To The Future

Marty McFly, a 17 year old all American schoolboy, is thrown into a world of chaos when his best friend Doctor Emmett Brown, an eccentric scientist, creates a time machine out of a De Lorian car.
Through circumstances out of his control, Marty is sent back to 1955 and ends up throwing his own existence into peril when his own mother falls in love with him, rather than falling in love with his father.
Marty must track down the younger version of Doc to aid him in saving his family and help to get him...

... Back To The Future.

It's extremely well written in terms of storytelling. It's original right down to it's core and occassionally steps on uncomfortable ground.
Though, even when elements of incest are brought into the screenplay, it's still one romping adventure that makes the audience cringe, laugh and squirm with excitement.

The 80s time travel classic set the benchmark for coolness and made skateboards famous with the iconic imagery of McFly doing what he does best on a plank and the music is fantastically placed brilliantly executed.

The acting is by far the best of the trilogy.
Michael J Fox as Marty McFly became the guy every boy wants to be. He's cool and 'in' and yet has an incredible naivety when he's thrown into the incomfortable circumstances.
Christopher Lloyd as Doc Brown is another plus point. Lloyd really makes the role come to life with his wacky behaviour and you can tell he had a lot of fun as the brilliant but slightly mad scientist.
Thomas F Wilson as the antagonist and school bully Biff Tannen is also magnificently dumb and punchy, and at times is highly unstable toward the end with some of his antics. Wilson also made it into my top 40 villains list.

With supporting cast from Lea Thompson and Crispin Glover as Marty's parents, the cast can't go wrong.

The effects though are what really surprised me when I first saw the movie. They're rarely used but when they're brought onto the screen they really take you with a delightful shock. They're wonderful.

All in all, it's not just an 80s classic, it's an originally original movie that has many never-before-seen ideas and touches, and even has Michael J Fox rocking out with a guitar too.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:35 PM

Back To The Future 2

McFly is once again thrown into the circuits of time, this time with 'old' Doc by his side. Marty's family in the year 2015 is in peril and they must stop certain things from happening.
However, an old foe gets his hands on the time machine and manages to change the entire history of both his own, and Mcfly's family.
It's up to Doc and Marty to go back to 1955 and put things back to how they should be. This time though, a happy ending may not be on the cards.

For a sequel, it's an interesting one. It's well written, but it feels as though the filmmakers tried to cram too much into one movie. We see the future, the present, the past and even alternate realities. At times it gets a little too much.
It is handled really well though and the story itself is expanded wonderfully between the antagonists and the protagonists.
There's even a nice twist in the story with going back to the past again, with the problem of bumping into the 'other selves' from the first film.

The effects are improved massively in this one. The future scenes had to be of course with flying vehicals etc and the originality of the first movie is really expanded in this one too, some of the iconography is wonderfully playful.

The acting is about the same as the first. The cast this time round play themselves through 3 different points in time and Fox even plays his own daughter.
No show this time round from Crispin Glover though. The circumstances behind his absence was also a cause for a lawsuit too.

All in all it's far more expansive and broader than the first film and has many original ideas, but, sadly lacks the charm and coolness of the original, except of course for the futuristic take on skateboards.
My rating 85%

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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:35 PM

Back To The Future 3

After the downbeat but exciting cliffhanger ending of the second film, Marty has drawn young Doc into the adventure once again. This time the mission is to save older Doc, who has unfortunately found himself trapped in the wild west of 1885.
So this time it's Marty bringing Doc... Back To The Future.

Sadly, the film feels like a cashed-in 'let's see what else we can do with the time travel thing'.
Though the second movie sets this one up, it still feels rushed and gimmicky.
Even though some of the plot points and iconography are again, quite original, they feels as though the filmmakers were using up their last remaining drops of imagination.
Some of the ideas that were put in toward the end of the movie also feel like they're jumping the shark a little bit too.

Though, all that said, the movie is still very entertaining. The comedy elements and acting are still top drawer and the action is also exciting when it gets going.
The wild west setting does give a different flavour to the movie, kind of the same way the future gave the second movie it's own touch.

The acting is a good point though too.
The cast seem to have had a bit more fun with this one. They're very tongue in cheek and mildly cheesy and even Christopher Lloyd seems to have turned his character more comic like.

There's not a great deal in the film when it comes to special effects due to the 1885 setting, but toward the end there is a big steamtrain sequence that combines 1980s tech, 1880s tech and tech from 2015 too, and by far it's the most exciting action sequence of the trilogy.

The little touch at the end is also a bit of a cliffhanger, leaving the audience to imagine.

All in all, a mildly cashed in affair, a step back from the second and definitely a step back from the first, but it's still exciting and has the best action scene toward the end and actually has a pretty good overall ending to the story, even after it looked as though it was going to fail.
My rating 80%
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)
4

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:36 PM

Lethal Weapon

A weathered and grumpy cop called Roger Murtaugh, who has just celebrated his 50th Birthday is reassigned a new partner, Martin Riggs.
Riggs, like Mutaugh, is a Vietnam Veteran but Riggs has suicidal tendencies due to his wife's recent death in a car crash.
Of course, this puts Murtaugh on the edge of dispair and the pair start out hating each other intensely.
When a crime hits close to home for Murtaugh, the disparate duo reconcile their differences, in the process gaining a mutual respect, and they go all out on a mission to save Murtaugh's young daughter.

The first of the franchise is one awesome film. The action is explosive, the choreography is fantastic, the humour is absolutely bang on and the acting is exactly what makes the film as good as it is.

For a start, the writing is simple, it's the typical buddy movie of the 80s. Two people hating each other, then finding common ground.
What makes Lethal Weapon so great is the screenplay and the chemisrty of the actors.
Danny Glover and Mel Gibson are brilliantly chalk and cheese. There's also no 'finding of feet' with the roles either. They're just there, fleshed out and very well written.

The other thing that really makes the movie work is the action.
Lethal Weapon is a borderline-no-brainer-action-up when the action starts, but with the wonderful writing behind the story and the characters, the action is extremely exciting and gets the audience on the edge of their seats.

The humour is also fantastically played. Some of it is laugh out loud, especially when Murtaugh and Riggs are in the thick of the action and Murtaugh is talking to himself.
A lot of the humour revolves around cheeky too. Riggs in particular has the best wind-ups for Murtaugh's grumpy nature.

The acting, as I said is brilliant I've mentioned Glover and Gibson but there's a few others that need a nod.
Gary Busey as Mr Joshua is brilliantly evil and brutal. He's broderline theatrical and is the perfect antagonist for Gibson's hero.
Mitchell Ryan as The General is another brilliant baddy to play off against Glover's Murtaugh. He's a simple baddy, but has a believable edge to him.
Steve Kahan as Riggs and Murtaugh's Police Captain is the typical shouty boss but he's got a likable side to his personality. His reactions to the main duo's antics is also funny.

As for any bad points, I can't really think of a great deal worth mentioning.

All in all it's another 80s classic from me and really set the tone for buddy-cop movies.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:37 PM

Lethal Weapon 2

Riggs and Murtaugh have settled into their partnership and have stumbled upon a South African criminal organisation that is, sadly, protected by the law.
At the same time, the duo must protect Leo Getz, a witness in a money laundering scam while they're investigating the criminal organisation.
When it turns out that the South Africans are part of the money laundering that Leo was part of and Leo is also kidnapped, Riggs and Murtaugh go all out to save Leo and stop the organisation from escaping back to South Africa.

This sequel is a rare event of being better than the first. It's more explosive, the writing is broader and the characters have been given more of a horizon with their characteristics. Riggs in particular is expanded as a character and there's a twist in the history of his life too.

There's also more main characters for the main duo to play off and get grumpy with as well. Leo Getz is brilliantly comic and annoying for the pair, he too eventually becomes a stalwart friend.
The baddies of the film are a little cliche, though they're brilliantly acted and threatening.

The underlying humour of the first film is a little more prominent in this one, but with the louder action, it works fantastically.

The acting is another plus.
Joe Pesci as Leo Getz is by far at his funniest. He's half the size of Glover and Gibson but his charisma on screen really gives the other actors something to work against. Personally, he's my favourite character.
Joss Ackland is great as the South African leader Arjen Rudd. He's unbending in his mission and brutal when needed.
Derrick O'Connor as Ackland's righthand man Pieter Vorstedt is definitely a naturalistic bad guy. He plays off Gibson fantastically.

All in all, it's bigger and louder than the first and has more of a horizon with the characters' lives. Certainly the best of the entire series.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:37 PM

Lethal Weapon 3

Three years after the second film, Riggs and Murtaugh stumble across illegal arms dealers during their interception of an attempted hijack of an armoured car.
It turns out that the arms dealers have developed a new type of bullet that can shoot through most substances, including metal and even bullet proof vests. Riggs and Murtaugh dub this new ammo 'cop killers'.
Of course, this also put all the cops in the area on high alert when it appears that the leader of these dealers is actually an ex-cop.
It's up to Riggs and Murtaugh and a new partner to take on these arms dealers, and stop the sale of 'cop killing bullets' across America.

The third film is a little stale compared to the first two. The story is sound and the writing is top notch, but it's the screenplay that lets it down. It feels just on the border of gimmicky.
It's going toward being a parody of itself and feels a little cliche with the plot.

What lifts the movie though is again, the action scenes. They're choreographed brilliantly and the added extras of being up against arms dealers with super weapons gives the audience some butt-clenching moments too.

The acting, again is top drawer.
Joe Pesci returns as Leo, though he was nearly written out of the script. Gladly he's back and annoying the main duo.
Rene Russo makes a welcome appearance as Lorna Cole, a love interest for Gibson. Her chemistry with Gibson is fantastic and she's tough but also approachable at the same time.
Rent-a-baddy Stuart Wilson as the ex cop Jack Travis a little cliche but he does the job well enough.

The comedy this time is a little more comicbook but the subtle undertones of tongue-in-cheek humour between Gibson, Russo and Murtaugh really works well.

All in all nowhere near as good as the lead up but still worthy of the Lethal Weapon title.
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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:38 PM

Lethal Weapon 4

Years after the third outing, Riggs and Murtaugh have now both become grizzled and old. Murtaugh is set to be a grandfather and Riggs and Lorna are also expecting their first child.
During a fishing trip, the duo, along with Leo are shot at from a passing ship. Upon the ship's crashing into the shore, they find the boat is full of illegal immigrants and they unwittingly expose a Chinese slave labour organisation.

The fourth movie is a slightly more welcome return to the serious side of the first two films.
The plot of the characters may feel well used but the overall writing of the screenplay really brings the movie to life.
There's some lovely little similarities between Riggs and Murtaugh's family lives too that give the whole film a nice depth.

The action is definitely the most exciting of the four films. Though it's not as explosive, it utilises overall action brilliantly. This time round it's Chinese Triads that the main cast are up against. Cue lots of brilliantly staged martial arts showdowns.

The humour is again very well used, the characters this time round are so well ingrained that the comedy just comes from the actors knowing where they are from the get go.

The acting is the same as the other films again, bang on the money.
This time we're treated to Jet Li as the main antagonist Wa Sing Ku. He's brilliantly evil and unbending in his quest to make money. When taunted though, he athletically becomes a force that both Riggs and Murtaugh combined, struggle to contain.
Chris Rock, an actor I can't stand, is actually quite entertaining as the father of Murtaugh's grandchild. He's funny, annoying for the main duo and plays off both Danny Glover and Joe Pesci fantastically.

The ending is also a plus point. It wraps up the franchise perfectly.

All in all, it's an improvment over the third outing and definitely worthy of the franchise name.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:41 PM

The Fellowship Of The Ring

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/0c/The_Fellowship_Of_The_Ring.jpg/220px-The_Fellowship_Of_The_Ring.jpg

Under the watchful eye of Gandalf The Grey (an incredibly old wizard), Frodo Baggins (a Hobbit from 'The Shire'), comes into possession of a gold coloured magical ring that has been passed down to him as an Heirloom from his Uncle Bilbo.
Gandalf reveals to Frodo that this magical ring is actually The One Ring that was forged by an incredibly powerful Dark Lord called Sauron thousands of years ago. After studying the legends of Sauron, Gandalf learns that the spirit of Sauron lives on in an almost ghostly form, and if he is reunited with this Master Ring, he will cover all of Middle Earth in darkness and evil for eternity.
Frodo immediately steps up to the challenge of taking the Ring to the powerful and wise Elves in a far away land called Rivendell.
But more unexpected adventure awaits, and many revelations will come to light that will take everyone involved in this journey to places that they really wish they weren't going.

Taken from J.R.R Tolkien's magnificent and history making novel, Peter Jackson has encapsulated everything fans would want to see and feel on the journey of Frodo and his friends.
For a start, a lot of the novels contain a great deal of random non-story and read almost like a historical document. Tolkien's books have been whittled down by Jackson and his writers to the bare story and have built an incredible screenplay in the process.
The other thing is the timelines of Tolkien's books. The book of The Fellowship takes place over 20 years or so, but this first film takes place over a few months. Though for on-screen purposes, they had to edit the timelines I guess.

The other thing that the filmmakers have done is built Tolkien's world of magic and history so successfully, it really feels as if the viewer has been transported into Middle Earth.
A lot of it is CG dependent, but it's very well put together, and when combined with the magnificent sets that were built, it really comes to realism.

The main part of the the movie that stands out though, is when the cast are placed in front of the fantastic backdrop of Middle Earth.

Elijah Wood as Frodo Baggins is mark of absolute genius. He's incredibly believable and captures the sheer essence of the character with such skill, it's hard to imagine anyone else in the role.
Backing him up is the wonderful Sean Astin as Frodo's friend/bodyguard/companion/gardener called Samwise Gamgee, and is another mark of genius. The on-screen chemistry between the two is brilliantly real and Astin is fantastically out of his depth, eventually becoming a stalwart warrior in the series of events.
Sir Ian McKellen as Gandalf... in fear of repeating myself... is yet another mark of genius from the filmmakers. McKellen was absolutely born for this role, even though at the time of filming, he hadn't ever read the novels.
Viggo Mortensen as Strider/Aragorn though, isn't quite what I was hoping for. His character has changed substantially in the transition from book to film, but Mortensen carries the rewritten role brilliantly.

Backing them up are Sean Bean as Boromir, Orlando Bloom as the kick-ass Elf Legolas, John Rhys-Davies as the Dwarf Gimli and...
Billy Boyd and Dominic Monaghan provide a touch of lighthearted comic relief as the Hobbits known as Peregrin 'Pippin' Took and Merriadoc 'Merry' Brandybuck respectively.
Plus a gazillion extras and stuntmen as the Orks and Uruk Hai enemies for the main group to battle against.

The overall on-screen chemistry between the main cast is great throughout.

The other thing that gets the audience is the incredible actions scenes that show from time to time. They're exciting and very well choreographed.

All in all, though there are quite a few changes in the book-film transition, including a few changes to characters and even the odd plotline, it's still a fantastic movie and captures pretty much everything a fan would want from the source material. And it works for anyone who hasn't read the books too, it's that good.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:42 PM

The Two Towers

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/2/2a/LOTRTTTmovie.jpg/220px-LOTRTTTmovie.jpg

Following on from directly The Fellowship of The Ring, Frodo and Sam are seperated from the rest of the group and find themselves stalked by a strange and upsetting character called Golum. They must protect the Ring from this creature and find a way to destroy the ring at the same time.
Meanwhile, Merry and Pippin have also been seperated from the group and captured by the Uruk Hai. In hot pursuit are Aragorn, Legolas and Gimli, determined to save their Hobbit friends from the awful fate that awaits them at the hands of the Uruk Hai.
Again though... more unexpected adventure awaits on the differing paths that our heroes have taken and in the process, it will bring our heroes to the brink of destruction.

Another masterclass in filmmaking... again with more cutting and the editing out of Tolkien's random ramblings and changes to the plot and the characters during the transition, however once again, the filmmakers have still managed to piece together a magnificent story that captures Tolkien's world.

The overall look of the film is more action oriented this time round but the character development involved gives the action a heartfelt excitement.
There's also massive expansion throughout the world of Middle Earth, especially with the extra characters that are seen throughout.
The CG work has also been improved, especially with the creature Golum, he's exceptionally realistic and Andy Serkis made his career in the role (I'll get to him later).

What really makes the movie stand apart from the first, is the action. It's absolutely immense. The audience are treated to a 10,000 strong Uruk Hai army, fighting against Humans and Elves. There's also an army of walking trees for the audience to get excitied over too.
The overall choreography in the action has been ramped up as well.

The acting throughout is as the first, Aragorn's role in the story is expanded and Frodo and Sam's side story makes for quite a dark turn of events and they all hit their roles with perfection.
Bernard Hill makes a welcome show as King Theoden, he's by far one of the best on show.
Karl Urban also makes an impression and the tough and able warrior called Eomer, and Nephew of King Theoden.

Andy Serkis is who steals the show though as Golum. The actor is never actually seen on-screen but the use of motion-capture and Serkis' voiceover in the role, Golum is exceptionally realistic and the CG used is top notch.

All in all, it outweighs the first film by miles with the slightly darker feel and expanded storylines.
But with more plot and character changes during the transition, I feel I must mark it down again like I did the first movie, though it doesn't take too much away.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:42 PM

The Return Of The King

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/0d/EsdlaIII.jpg/220px-EsdlaIII.jpg

With Frodo and Sam getting closer to the goal of destroying The One Ring, Golum has other plans for the duo, and Sam must figure out what it is that he's up to before it's too late.
Meanwhile Gandalf and Pippin have headed to Minas Tirith, the main human city in a land called Gondor, as Pippin has accidentally discovered Sauron's plans to attack the place in the hope that it will send humans into a state of disrepair. It's up to Gandalf and Pippin to warn and prepare the city for the oncoming onslaught.
King Theoden, along with Eomer is building an army of King Theoden's men and a few allies and are also heading to Minas Tirith to support the war against Sauron.
Legolas, Gimli and Aragorn have taken a seperate path, where Aragorn must either face his destiny, or leave Middle Earth to fall apart around him under the brutality of Sauron.

Once again, the filmmakers have ramped absolutely everthing up for the third installment of LOTR.
Though there's not as many new added lead characters involved, the existing characters are given much more personal expansion in this one, especially with King Theoden and Aragorn... but it's with Frodo and Sam that the real character writing makes an impression as Frodo falls deep into the evilness of The Ring.

What the viewer is given though is a look at a few other various Peoples of Middle Earth, even though many of them are bad guys.

There's also a massive expansion in the action side of things too. The audience are given more huge battles that take up most of the second and third acts of the film... one battle in particular is supposedly close to a half million strong enemy force.

The CG work and choreography is also ramped up again.

The acting throughout is, again, spot on. There's more chemistry this time round (if that was even possible), especially between Mortensen, Bloom and Rhys-Davies.
Elijah Wood and Sean Astin though really steal the show in this third film. Frodo's descent into madness and darkness is exceptionally well played by Wood, and Astin's "Samwise The Brave" is really a show of genuine acting.

All in all, a fitting and satisfactory end to Jackson's trilogy (I say Jackson's trilogy, as it is Jackson's, not Tolkien's). Again though, various changes in character and plot mark it down for me... but it's still an absolutely spell binding movie, a touch more improved than the second movie too and still well deserving of LOTR's title.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:45 PM

Mission: Impossible

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/e1/MissionImpossiblePoster.jpg/220px-MissionImpossiblePoster.jpg

Jim Phelps and his team are set the task of recovering a stolen disc containing the identities of IMF's Secret Agents ('IMF' is Impossible Mission Force).
After a botched attempt at recovery, Phelps and his team are ambushed by another team and only two survivors remain, Frontman Ethan Hunt and Phelps' Wife, Claire.
There was evidence that a mole was part of the team and IMF immediately declare Mission Frontman Ethan as the mole and make him #1 on their hitlist.
Ethan and Claire must do everthing they can...

... to discover the true identity of the traitor, clear their names and recover the disc that could finish off IMF forever.

Keeping relatively true to the original series, MI gives the audience an almost perfect reboot of the franchise.
Brian De Palma's direction is absolutely fantastic and the overall writing, though with the odd controversial rewritten character, is absolutely bang on the money.
The plot is relatively complex, when I first watched, I was about 14 years old and was completely lost, but it's still a rip roaring spy movie in terms of actual storytelling. Which is something that most action spy movies are lacking to be honest.

The action is also brilliant. It starts out relatively small and gets progressively larger as the movie goes on... until the climax in which one the most exciting scenes in movie history takes place.
It's also wonderfully choreographed.

The acting is also great.
Tom Cruise as Ethan Hunt is the perfect Secret Agent. He's handsome, smart and knows how to give a bad guy a run for his money.
Jon Voight as Jim Phelps was, and still is, controversial. His character was rewritten by the filmmakers, but it actually adds to the tension and emotion of the movie and Voight is fantastic.
Emmanuelle Beart as Claire Phelps is a mark of genius. She's beautiful, naive and still has an air of intelligence about her. Her acting is spot on too.

Backed up by an ensemble cast of Jean Reno, Ving Rhames, Kristin Scott Thomas, Vanessa Redgrave, Emilio Estevez and Henry Czerny.

All in all, not the best of the MI movies, but certainly a benchmark for the series. Very well written in terms of story and plot... and the action, though not as explosive as many fans would like, is still exciting especially when that MI music gets going.
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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:45 PM

Mission: Impossible - 2

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/48/Mission_Impossible_II.jpg

Rogue IMF Agent Sean Ambrose has got his hands on a powerful viral weapon called Chimera, and also has the cure. His plans are to release the virus and hold the world at ransom for the cure and make billions for himself in the process.
Ethan Hunt and his team are called into action to stop him...

... and whether he wants to or not, must threaten the lives of the people closest to him, to get the job done.

Much more explosive sequel to the already exciting first film.
MI2 was given to director John Woo and his team of wizards, and the results are spectacular visually.
The overall storyline and plot aren't as well pieced together as the first movie, but there is a love story going on for our main man Ethan.
The basic premise of the film has been done time and time again, bad guy with a viral weapon and needs to be stopped, but Woo's direction is brilliant, especially when the story is mixed into his typical fists and guns out action.

The action is fantastic. It's like a martial arts meets James Bond meets John Woo slow-motion and high octane motorbike chases.
It's also brilliantly choreographed and gets the viewer on the edge of their seats.

The acting is about the same in this one.
We're treated to Thandie Newton this time round as the Hero's squeeze and she's almost perfect in the role. Her initial role of catburglar isn't really fitting for the actress though.

Dougray Scott makes a nice appearance as the main antagonist though. He's believable and has fun with the script.
Ving Rhames is also utilised more in this one and he hits the role perfectly.

All in all, visually brilliant, but the story needed a bit more complexity rather than the gimmick of a love interest.
Even though, I'd rate MI2 as an improvement over the first, simply because of the highly exciting scenes that make the slightly lacking storyline work so well.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:46 PM

Mission: Impossible - 3

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/4/4c/Mi_III.jpg/220px-Mi_III.jpg

Black Market Dealer Owen Davian is being watched by IMF as he has a mysterious object known as "The Rabbit's Foot", a possible deadly virus.
Whatever this object actually is, it is obviously highly dangerous if Davian has it up for sale, and Ethan Hunt and his team are called into action to recover the item, and bring Davian in for interrogation...

... but Ethan's new Wife is brought into play when Davian shows himself to be more skilled in escape than they realised.

This time JJ Abrams makes his feature film debut as director and he really nails it... right down to the smallest details.

The movie is even more explosive this time round and the story hasn't taken second place either.
It's not as complex as the first, but it's still full of little twists and turns and the overall writing is absolutely top notch, especially the character writing and the audience connection to the characters.

What makes MI3 stand out though, is that it doesn't lose the viewer like the first one did. It's that well pieced together.

The action is also highly exciting. There's more real world based action going on with the odd hit of fantasy based choreography too, which gives it an edge over the second movie in terms of excitement. With the character connection the audience has, it makes it even better.

This time round the audience has Ethan's new wife in the form of Michelle Monaghan and she's absolutely perfect as the lost girl who finds an inner strength when the going gets tough.

It's Philip Seymour Hoffman as antagonist Owen Davian who steals the show though. He's highly threatening and very believable as a baddie.
Hoffman at one point has to eminate Cruise's performance due to the 'rubber mask thing' that MI is famous for and he's absolutely spot on.

All in all, another improvement in the franchise. More action, more story, more enigmatic direction and one of my favourite action films going.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:46 PM

Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/b5/Mission_impossible_ghost_protocol.jpg/220px-Mission_impossible_ghost_protocol.jpg

During a routine mission, one of IMF's Agents is killed in the field and a file containing Russian Nuclear Launch Codes ends up going missing.
The team behind the botched mission call in Ethan Hunt to take control of their mistake in the hope they can fix this rather big problem.
However, after their mission takes another turn for the worse, Ethan and the team are labelled as Terrorists and IMF is shut down by the President Of The United States.
Ethan and the team must get their acts together and go Rogue, in order to recover the Codes, find the real Terrorists...

... and stop the entire world from entering into a Nuclear War.

Brad Bird takes the helm for this installment and it's not as explosive as its predecessors.
It is however, very exciting in terms of story rather than just exciting in terms of action. The Nuclear War threat is the main thing in this one and the stakes have never been higher for our Hero... and the writers really nail the importance of this story.
There'a also nice little twists and turns in terms of character development too which was slightly lacking in the previous three movies.

The action, as I said, isn't as big and brash in this one, but is utilised as needed and some of the scenes involving Ethan having to sneak around various Government buildings are toe-curling in terms of tension.

There's also a little more humour in this one with the presence of Simon Pegg. It adds a more universal feel to the film and makes for a few, almost slapstick laughs.

The acting this time round has been finely tuned with Cruise. He's very good as the Agent gone Rogue.
Jeremy Renner makes a fantastic appearance as William Brandt... an IMF Analyst who is more than he seems.

Simon Pegg, as I said, makes a great show as Benji. A newly qualified Field Agent and stalwart pal of Ethan.

There's not much of a show from the bad guys this time round... they're more mysterious than anything else, but it adds to the flavour of the secrecy of their mission.

All in all, a step back in terms of action, but the story makes up for that and gives the action scenes more of an impact when they happen. It's also by far the most universal in terms of audience connection due to the humour involved.
My rating, the same as MI3 at 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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:49 PM

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)
rating_5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:52 PM

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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:52 PM

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)
0.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:54 PM

Kick-Ass
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/30/Kick-Ass_film_poster.jpg

Year Of Release

2010

Director

Matthew Vaughan

Producer

Adam Bohling, Tarquin Pack, Brad Pitt, David Reid

Writer

Mark Millar, John Romita Jr, Jane Goldman, Matthew Vaughan

Cast

Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Chloë Grace Moretz, Nicolas Cage, Mark Strong, Christopher Mintz-Plasse and Morris Chestnut

---

New York teenager Dave is a regular kid. He hangs out with friends, loves his comic books and wonders why nobody has ever actually donned a suit and done it for real.
Until the day he buys himself what resembles a wetsuit and some batons off the internet and heads out into the city.

After some teething problems and an incident that leaves him with damaged nerve-endings meaning his pain threshold is higher than most other people… Dave finds himself drawn back onto the streets and ends up defending a man who is being beaten by a gang of thugs.

Dave then labels himself as “Kick-Ass” to a by passer with a cell-phone who recorded the whole thing…

… and Kick-Ass becomes an immediate internet sensation.

But his new found fame draws the attention of a pretty disturbing Father-Daughter team who have been planning their own little superhero adventure with their own motives… and together, the three head out into the city and make enemies with a rather dangerous Crime-Lord.

---

Absolutely brilliant.
Based on the comic of the same name, Kick-Ass gives all the thrills and spills of a genuine comic book movie and manages to throw in some real world blood and guts, bad language and some border-ultraviolent action crossed with some more fantastical action too.

For a start, there are some genuine laughs to be had throughout the running time. It’s all reality based too and keeps within a situational humour most of the time.

The second thing that makes an impact is the huge connection the audience gets to the characters. They’re all extremely well fleshed out and well written.
The other thing is the likeability, or un-likeability, of the characters… the overall writing is spot on and makes for some memorable roles and even the bad guys have you laughing from time to time.

What really makes the biggest mark though, for me, is the screenplay and scripting. The sequence of events is pretty polished and believable and draws the audience into the story.
Some of the dialogue is also really funny, especially when Hit Girl appears.

One thing missing though, is that the film never really has any defining moment. No moment of realisation as such. It tends to rely more on plot devices that push the screenplay along… but one thing, the exposition is spot on which makes all the smaller moments work well.

The acting is also bang on.
Aaron Taylor-Johnson is the perfect choice for Kick-Ass. His naïve and out-of-his-depth persona works wonderfully for the weedy geek in a suit. As the story progresses though and Kick-Ass comes out of his shell, ATJ really nails the role and actually seems to grow with the plot.

Mark Strong also makes an impression as head baddie Frank D’Amico. He’s pretty close to the role he played in Robin Hood just with a bit extra comedy thrown in, but the dry bad guy role works brilliantly.

Christopher Mintz-Plasse as the nerdy and slightly unhinged Chris D’Amico (aka; Red Mist), Frank’s son, also makes a decent show. He’s more of a backup role to start that ends up play a huge part in getting Kick-Ass into trouble and simply wants to be like his crime lord Father.

Standout roles though… Nicolas Cage and Chloë Grace Moretz as Father-Daughter team Big Daddy and Hit Girl.
Cage’s take on the slightly nerdy yet incredibly tough ex-Cop with a motive is most definitely my favourite role of Cage’s. He also portrays a sense of disturbing psychopathy too.
Moretz though, of the two, makes the biggest impression. What we’re talking here is a 5ft tall, 7 stone powerhouse who swears like a builder, smashes heads together like a seasoned wrestler and spins around the bad guys like Yoda in the Prequel Trilogy. Her more sombre and quieter scenes, and especially the occasional emotional scenes, are held brilliantly by Moretz.

Backup comes from Morris Chestnut, Clark Duke, Evan Peters, Michael Rispoli, Lyndsy Fonesca and Yancy Butler.

Now, the action and effects.
Fast, brutal, bloody, occasionally funny and definitely what the film revels in when they get going.
The choreography is top drawer too. Along with the fantastical side of the action toward the end of the film, there’s a pretty realistic build up during the running time. It basically starts out in reality before going more into the comic book style.

The soundtrack throughout backs up every scene, whether action or more quieter settings, perfectly too.

---

All in all, Kick-Ass almost redefines the Comic Book Movie Genre with its sheer content and style. In a similar way to maybe Dredd that was released two years later. Kick-Ass is much more colourful in looks though and will appeal to a wider audience.

Tons of fun with a decent build-up style script and lashings of highly stylised and exciting ultraviolence.

A damned good Superhero movie.

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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:55 PM

Kick-Ass 2
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/44/Kick-Ass_2_International_Poster.jpg

Year Of Release

2013

Director

Jeff Wadlow

Producer

Adam Bohling, Tarquin Pack, Matthew Vaughan, Brad Pitt, David Reid

Writer

Mark Millar, John Romita Jr, Matthew Vaughan

Cast

Aaron Taylor-Johnson, Chloë Grace Moretz, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Jim Carrey, Donald Faison, Morris Chestnut and John Leguizamo

---

Years after the first film, Dave has given up crime fighting and has grown bored with his humdrum life. His love life has suffered as well.
Mindy (Hit Girl) however, is still sneaking out at night and skiving school so she can bash heads together in the name of Justice.

Dave decides to make a change and talks to Mindy about training and getting back into the business… and Mindy takes him up on the offer and trains him extensively.
But when Mindy’s adopted Father figure Detective Marcus Williams tells Mindy that she must give up the Cape, Mindy reluctantly agrees, leaving Dave alone on the streets.

But more adventure is around the corner when Chris D’Amico (Red Mist in the first film) has now reinvented himself as the ultimate bad guy, known as The Motherf*cker… and incredibly wealthy villain who simply pays the worst of the worst to do his dirty work for him, and D’Amico has but one mission; to kill Kick-Ass, or, destroy everything Kick-Ass loves.

But Kick-Ass has backup coming in the form of a vigilante group headed by Colonel Stars And Stripes…

“When the cops can no longer Protect And Serve,
Be warned, Mugger, heads up, Perv,
We got the strength, we got the nerve,
To give those in need, what they deserve!
Justice Forever!”

---

Just like real time, the films have 3 years between them and the story has progressed with it too.
The audience is treated to a slightly expanded story when it comes to the lives of the characters and manages to add some more realistic touches to the proceedings that were seen in the first film.
Especially when it comes to Chris D’Amico.
This film shows his progression from frustrated and angry kid to a genuinely twisted and almost perverted spoiled brat with an agenda. Definitely a good move for this film, it makes for a more personal battle between him and Kick-Ass as we see D’Amico’s well written development.

We’re also treated to Hit Girl and her character expansion from what is essentially a lost, confused and damaged young girl into a strong woman who has to find her place in the world.

Gradually though, like with the original, the filmmakers make things get bigger as the movie goes on and eventually we get a well pieced together progressive story around the characters we all met and learned about in the first film.

There’s also the same recognisable humour that was seen in the first film laced throughout this one too.

The acting again is bang on.
Aaron Taylor-Johnson is improved as Dave/Kick-Ass. His slightly expanded character is a nice touch but ATJ hasn’t changed our Hero so much that he becomes something too different. There is an incident toward the end that makes for a new twist on the character development and it adds a new depth to our green/yellow Hero.
ATJ has also beefed up substantially for the role, and his fight scenes are a hell of a lot better. Aaron really put the work in.

Christopher Mintz-Plasse is much better this time round. You get the impression he’s been given more free reign with the script too and the longer screen time is good to see.

Moretz returns as Mindy/Hit Girl and she’s definitely the most improved of the 3 main returning cast members in both writing and acting. Her role has been given more of an arc too and it makes her character even more likeable. Moretz alos nails the role.

Additions are our Superteam Justice Forever… Donald Faison as Doctor Gravity (funny role), Lindy Booth as Night-Bitch, Robert Emms as Insect Man and…

… Jim Carrey is completely unrecognisable as Colonel Stars And Stripes.
Carrey absolutely makes this film when he’s on screen. It’s just a shame that he’s not on screen for the entire running time. He’s absolutely brilliant and definitely the best of the background actors.

Backup comes from Morris Chestnut again, with John Leguizamo, Olga Kurkulina (brilliant role) and a cameo from Iain Glen.
Glen in particular I can see making a showing if they ever make Kick-Ass 3. His cameo is memorable.

The action this time round is about the same as the first… starting relatively small and then getting larger…

We’re treated to some great choreography again though and a lot of the action and fighting has the story to back it up this time too.
It’s definitely more personal in this film.

Again though, the soundtrack backs it all up brilliantly.

---

All in all, improved in the storytelling and character development and actually has a few of those realisation moments that were lacking from the original. Better writing throughout and keeping with the tone and style of the first film which makes it feel, well, connected.

It is lacking any sort of larger scale action which should be seen in a sequel though.

Still a great Superhero movie though.

My rating: Same as the first, 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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:58 PM

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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 08:58 PM

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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:03 PM

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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:04 PM

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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:05 PM

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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:09 PM

Ok... that's it then.

I reviewed Days Of Future Past last week and have broken up all the X-Films I did a while back ^^ so over the next couple days I'll ping up a review for The Wolverine to complete the set.

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:26 PM

Young Guns
Ok, an older film but I thought, seeing as it's my favourite movie.

Based loosely on the Lincoln County War of 1878 and the beginnings of the Billy The Kid Legend. Film makers decided the use of 'Brat Pack' actors would be good for a serious movie and they hit on a very special cast.

For a start, the acting from all parties is spot on. Terrence Stamp as John Tunstall is (as always with Stamp) a very inviting character, mature, wise and mildly amusing.
Emilio Estevez as Kid is an inspired piece of casting, Estevez carries the Kids persona extremely well. Young, cheeky, trigger happy, streetwise and also naive.
Supporting/almost main actors include Jack Palance, Charlie Sheen (before he was apparently 'winning'), Kiefer Sutherland, Casey Siemaszko, Lou Diamond Phillips and Dermot Mulroney.
All in all, the handsome cast of 'good guys' teamed against Palance's group of grizzly, hairy bad guys makes you route for the Regulators even more.

The entire movie has a feel of being shot with a sepia filter on the camera lense, not a bad thing though, it adds to the authenticity of the Wild West setting.
The climactic gunfight scenes are wonderfully staged if a little slow to get going.

The bad points: It's loosely based on fact. Said to be the most accurate movie based on the Lincoln War, and I'd agree it is the most accurate film outside of a documentary, but it's still far from actual fact.
The Lincoln War it's self has more to it, which could have made for a longer, maybe more interesting movie.
Though throw those thoughts aside, crack open a bottle and enjoy a well made western.

One thing that will throw the audience is that, what appears to be an OTT gunfight ending, actually happened in real life.

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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:27 PM

A Nightmare On Elm Street (2010 Remake)

It's always a mistake to remake any film, but to take an icon like Kruger (ok, Kruger's sequels weren't great but the original was cool) is almost stepping on hallowed ground.

The movie suffers from what I call 'Scott's Robin Hood Fever':
Take an idea and story, remove the slight campyness of the movie's villian and hero, remove the tongue in cheek giggles and completely remove the dash of popcorn fun...

... and then repeatedly and persistantly rabbit-punch the viewer in the face with the mentality of 'this is serious and real, you will be shocked and scared and sit in awe because this is serious and real'.
It just makes the whole thing fall flat on it's @rse.

Slow, tedious, basic teen slasher with no genuine explanation to how the teens in the movie are able to figure out in their heads what's going on around them, they just seem to know what's happening automatically. Coming from a bunch of teenagers who all, apparently, are thick enough to have no memory at all of when they were 5 years old. Seems slightly, no, massively like a bad piece of rewriting.
Maybe they saw the original Nightmare on their iPads.

The only good thing in the film is Jackie Earle Haley as Kruger. His twist on the character is fresh and makes it his own creation, but it's still not enough to warrant making the movie.

All in all, about as scary, as well written and as mysterious, as a 1960s episode of Scooby Doo.

My rating 2%
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)
rating_0_5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:28 PM

Alien Vs Predator

AvP falls flat at the first hurdle: Game to Movie maestro Paul WS Anderson being director. He may be ok at converting video games, but movie-universe crossovers, he is not.
Let’s face it, Mortal Kombat is probably his best movie to date and even then that was a run of the mill all-action no-brainer.

The first film’s first good point starts with being able to successfully combine the two franchises relatively well. Though the overall plot is unbelievable, it works.

A company, owned by super-billionaire Charles Wayland Bishop, using satellites discovers a heat signature under polar ice.

A team of scientists, archaeologists and mercenaries is sent out to investigate the mysterious appearance and find themselves embroiled in a millennia long, macabre ‘tradition’ held by the Predator species.

The movie tries it’s best to be mysterious and brooding and tries to push itself into claustrophobic ‘haunted mansion’ territory.

Sadly, after all the build up, the mysterious back-story is slapped down with a very quick and simple explanation.
Usual of Anderson, get the story out of the way after a pretty good build up, then crack on with the explosions and fist fights.

Which is pretty much all the film is from then on after: Alien Vs Predator.

Another thing that the movie suffers with, is lack of snot and gore. Something the Alien and Predator franchises both utilise efficiently. It feels as though the makers wanted to dumb down the blood and guts to appeal to a wider, young audience.

Probably the best part of the entire movie is the acting.
Sanaa Lathan, Lance Henriksen and Ewen Bremner do their best to make the plot plausible, playing it as straight faced as they can.
The special effects are a close second. The CGI Aliens are well rendered.
Sadly, that's about it.

All in all, another no-brainer from Anderson, good for post pub 1am entertainment.
My rating 25%

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)
rating_1_5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:30 PM

Aliens Vs Predator 2: Requiem

For a start, a change in director is the best decision the studios could have made. The Brothers Strause definitley know what they’re doing.
Set barely minutes after the first film, the Predator ship from the first movie crashes in a small Colorado town, unleashing the Facehugger contents of their hold onto the unsuspecting town inhabitants.

For a start, this sequel is by far superior, the action, the writing, the more practical special effects all make for a much more fun movie. CGI is kept to a minimum, though when used, it’s used extremely well.

One fault with the movie is it’s very dark. I don’t mean in humour, I mean the lighting. Sadly some of the action and background shots can be missed on first viewing.
The only other fault is, as with AvP, the blood and gore is kept to a minimum. Though the filmmakers went in another direction: Shocks.
The movie excels and making the audience feel uneasy with some of the death scenes.

The acting is standard for the type of movie. Gladly though, it's believable, the cast aren't all huge names which gives the audience a connection to the characters.

AvP 2 tries to go back to basics with the look too. Think James Cameron’s Aliens crossed with elements of McTiernan’s Predator and set in a concrete jungle, on a similar note to Predator 2.
Another thing the movie utilises is a plotline from Alien 3, the Alien takes on the characteristics of it’s host. This time, the Alien has gestated inside one of the Predators though I’ll leave it at that, you’ll have to watch.

All in all, not a fantastic movie, fairly standard, but a superior movie to AvP.
My rating 70%

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)
3.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:31 PM

The Terminator

Set in the 1980s, Sarah Connor (Linda Hamilton) is stalked by a humanoid machine sent from the future. Her only hope and help, is a man called Kyle Reese (Michael Biehn), also sent from the future, to stop the machine. If Sarah dies, the human race will become extinct as her (as yet unborn) son will become a freedom fighter and leader of the human resistance, in a war between man, and an entire army of these humanoid machines.

James Cameron’s sci-fi horror is a masterclass of how to make an expensive looking sci-fi, on a shoestring budget. Written absolutely perfectly, Cameron has made a well-established piece of movie history. A modern day fairy tale almost.
Being that the concept of The Terminator machine itself came to Cameron in a fever induced nightmare gives me at least, a respect for the depths of the human psyche and for Cameron’s imagination.

The film does suffer from slightly dodgy special effects. The stop-motion Terminator was mediocre at best even for the standard of the 80s.

What really makes the film’s effects a success though, is Stan Winston’s prosthetics on Arnold Swarzenegger.

By today’s standard, again, they are fairly rudimentary but they still work. You genuinely believe Arnie’s face is coming off.
Mix to that, not just the way the movie is written, but the way the movie is made. The direction, scene placing and overall aura of the subject matter are a joy to watch.

Hamilton, Biehn, Swarzenegger are all fantastic in their roles.

Hamilton is beautifully lost in the series of terrifying, far-out events and eventually becomes a tougher person as the movie progresses.
Biehn’s rough, tough, emotionless soldier of the future becomes more human-like as he spends more time with Connor.
Arnie is wonderfully wooden as the over-6-foot 500lb non stop killer machine.

All in all this fantastic roller coaster is one for the movie history books.
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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:32 PM

Terminator 2: Judgment Day

Sarah Connor is once again embroiled in the fight for the future. Again, a machine is sent from the future to take out the leader of the human resistance, though this time, the target is John Connor himself.

Between the movies, Sarah has given birth and raised John with a military upbringing.
The movie begins after that sequence of events when Sarah has been locked in a mental institute and 10-year-old John, now seen by the authorities as a wild-child and criminal, has been put into foster care.

Again, the human resistance has sent another protector for Sarah and John. Not a mere man this time though, but a reprogrammed Arnold Swarzenegger.

Again, Cameron hits the nail right on the head. The movie drops most of the horror genre and goes on full out sci-fi action with only the occasional horror touch.

A bigger budget, utilised by the filmmakers perfectly, gives T2 even better effects and this time round, there’s beautifully rendered CGI in the form of the bad guy: A ‘liquid metal’ Terminator for Arnie to have a rumble with.

The action, when it gets going is fast, furious, explosive and is gladly, broken up by short spells of quiet acting from the cast. The movie is very well put together.

Hamilton is fantastic in the role of Sarah Connor, this time round she’s a rough, tough soldier, almost like Biehn in the first movie, though her dreams of the impending apocalypse have sent her beyond madness. She plays the role perfectly.
Edward Furlong, in his first role of any kind (he was picked off the street) isn’t perfect, but being that he had no experience, he still does a job that several actors since haven’t been able to better.
Arnie as the Terminator is again, wonderfully wooden at the beginning, though as the movie progresses, like with Reese and Connor in the first movie, he is able to take on and learn characteristics of those around him. Eventually he becomes more humane than the humans in the movie.
Robert Patrick as the liquid metal T1000 is an absolute wonder to watch. He has the emotion the original Terminator and has such a menace about him, you can’t take your eyes off him.

All in all a sci-fi popcorn wonder. File it directly under The Terminator in the movie history books.

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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:33 PM

Terminator 3: Rise Of The Machines.

This is where things got messy for the franchise.
Once again, John Connor is thrown into a fight for survival. A female Terminator is sent from the future to take Connor out, Arnie is once again sent back to protect him.
Most of the scenes in this third outing are unintentionally funny. Some have been written to be funny, yet they aren’t.

The makers have turned the franchise completely in the wrong direction: Horror sci-fi to sci-fi action with horror, to…

… comedy? Oh dear.

The whole thing just feels cheap, cashed in, rushed, and a storyline that does nothing to expand on the existing material.
It tries to expand, but falls flat on its face. It just doesn’t try hard enough.

The action is explosive, grand and loud. It’s definitely a popcorn no-brainer.

The other thing with the way it’s been written is it’s very gimmicky.
A female Terminator who uses Nano-bots and is a cross between Arnie and Patrick, no Sarah Connor but John has a female accomplice and Arnie is a good guy again, it’s just, well, samey.

Arnie seems to just go through the role like he’s going through the motions. He’s got that wooden-ness that we’re all familiar with, but it feels unintentional this time round.
Nick Stahl as Connor is another huge mistake. The guy can barely get his lines out without shouting and breathing heavily. Is that really what an actor needs to do to seem serious?

The good point of the movie is the CGI used on the Terminatrix. It works great, but what made the first two movies special, was actually having practical effects mixed in too.

All in all a miss on the grandest of scales. My rating 10%

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)
0.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:33 PM

Terminator Salvation.

Back to basics for the franchise, almost.
Relying heavily on action and with a decent story thrown in, Salvation works, it’s better than T3, but still, isn’t great.

This time round the makers have based the movie in the future. Set after the initial apocalypse, John Connor is a soldier fighting for the resistance, he’s not a leader yet and is talked down to by his commanders.

The mission of the movie is that Kyle Reese has surfaced in Los Angeles and is being hunted and targeted by the machines.
It’s up to Connor to save him and make sure that the future of mankind is saved, as Kyle is the one who will go back and protect Sarah.

That’s about it really as far as the story goes but the CGI action is very well put together. One thing missing from the movie though, are the scenes of the ‘future war’ that were shown in the first two movies: Dark, skulls everywhere and scores of Terminators fighting at ground level against battered and beaten humans.
The overall look of Salvation seems to be dumbed down from that apocalyptic look. Hopefully, if a sequel is released, it’ll be added back in.

Christian Bale as Connor does a good job, if very growly. As always with Bale, his physical presence on screen carries the character well.
Anton Yelchin as Kyle Reese is almost spot on. Yelchin does a fantastic job at recreating Biehn’s speech pattern and accent, he looks the part too.
Sam Worthington as Marcus Wright is brilliantly confused as the mysterious man who is more than he appears. Though only very occasionally he misses his mark.
The movie isn’t perfect. It lacks soul, but is far superior to T3.

Though Schwarzenegger doesn’t make an appearance per say, his model of Terminator is seen using some exceptionally well rendered special effects.

All in all welcome return to a more serious kind of Terminator movie.
My rating 75%

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)
4

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:35 PM

Full Metal Jacket

Based during the Vietnam War, the movie starts with a bunch of new recruits in the Marine Corps. Initially following their adventures in the basic training programme then following some of them when they’re shipped off to fight the war.

The beginning of the movie, though brutal and realistic, is incredibly funny and extremely engaging. The young school leavers are thrown into a world they’ve never seen before and the humour comes from their uneasy relationship with their Drill Sergeant.
The relationship between Private Leonard Lawrence (aka Private Pyle) and the rest of the group, in particular with the Sergeant is extremely laugh out loud and at times even cringe worthy, right up until the end.

After the initial hit of humour, the movie takes a serious turn when the setting moves to Vietnam. The brutal and harsh conditions faced by the soldiers is brilliantly portrayed and very real. The movie tends to delve into how the soldiers feel about the war but still has the occasional hit of humour mixed in too.

The main fault with the movie, is that even though the second half of the film is just as well made as the first, it doesn’t quite have the same appeal. It’s much more raw, which can put a lot of people off.

The acting from all parties is absolutely brilliant, Matthew Modine as the main character the film follows is at his absolute best as the naïve recruit who physically changes over the film into a well trained U.S Marine.
R Lee Ermey as the tough Drill Sergeant is absolutely brilliant, a role so infamous that has often been parodied in many a film, even by Ermey himself. He absolutely steals the first half of the movie.

Even if Vietnam War movies aren’t your thing, it’s worth watching for the basic training.

All in all a very well made Vietnam War flick, though the second half is a little more of a Marmite question, it’s well worth your time.
My rating 85%
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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:36 PM

Demolition Man

Set in the future, this highly implausible action movie still seems to push all the right buttons.

In present day, cop John Spartan (Sly Stallone) is charged with the deaths of hostages in a botched rescue, he is frozen in suspended animation as a ‘jail’ sentence. At the same time, an ultraviolent Simon Phoenix (Wesley Snipes) is also frozen as he was the one who initially kidnapped the people.

In the future, Phoenix is released to find that the place is a giant utopia of peace and tranquillity. He immediately sets about showing the softy residents and police officers how it’s done ‘old skool’ and goes about trying to make the city his own.
So Spartan is released also. They need an old fashioned cop to catch an old fashioned criminal.

As you can imagine, with Sly and Snipes in the lead roles, from then on it’s all smash and crash and cheesy one-liners for 90 minutes.

It’s a fun no-brainer, primarily aimed at mid-teenaged boys and the acting is about standard for the type of smash-em-up movie it is.

One thing that doesn’t make sense, is that this utopian future is based solely in one city after the event of a massive earthquake. What about the rest of the world outside? Surely this is the movie’s biggest plot hole.

Snipes in particular is fun, doing all the things most of the mid-teens watching would like to do.
Stallone is at his usual.
The supporting cast works well, Sandra Bullock is wonderfully out of place amongst the action and Nigel Hawthorne is, as always, very natural in his surroundings.

All in all a loud, brash no-brainer that shouldn’t make sense, yet in a way, does.
My rating 70%

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)
rating_3_5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:37 PM

Dumb and Dumber

One of the finest comedies ever made. Lloyd Christmas and Harry Dunn (Jim Carrey and Jeff Daniels) are two hopelessly dippy individuals looking for a better life, yet do nothing to actually make it happen.

When Lloyd comes into possession of a briefcase belonging to what he thinks is his one true love, Mary Swanson (a beautiful looking Lauren Holly before she went skinny). The pair head off on a road trip to return the case to Mary and hope she "plucks them into the social pipeline".
Unknown to them, the case actually contains a ransom for Mary’s husband and they’re being followed by a hitman who wants the case for his boss.

After that, the movie goes from funny, to laugh out loud, to hysterical, to pant wettingly hilarious. It’s incredibly well written in terms of humour.
Every line spoken in the movie is either a double entendre or is something that one of the duo has misunderstood.

Be warned though, the movie contains a lot of rude and crude humour too, including Lloyd’s reactions to an attempted male rape and Harry’s poopy-toilet scene after Lloyd spikes his drink for a vengeful-laugh.

It also has it’s fair share of buddy moments, Carrey and Daniels have brilliant chemistry throughout the entire movie, they bounce off one another perfectly and when the occasional hit of tragedy strikes, you really feel for them.

The acting, overall, from all parties is spot on.

The only fault with the film as that it’s just not long enough. You want more and more and more.

All in all, the best comedy I have seen to date outside of Ace Ventura: Pet Detective.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:38 PM

Ridley Scott's Robin Hood.

For something that is based on a series of 1000 year old, incomplete ballads, Robin Hood is something that is never seems to leave the mind of the populous.
The movie is set before Robin Hood’s legend of ‘robbing from the rich and giving to the poor’.
It’s more of a lead up to the legend. How Robin came to be the outlaw we all know and love.

Sadly, it’s a very confused story, it takes elements of the legend, elements that are seen during the robbing and giving, mixed with some new stuff and crosses them over.

Some elements are completely ignored from the original ballads, for instance how Robin and Little John become friends.

The problem is also the seriousness of the movie. Robin Hood is a campy legend. Always has been. I’m not just on about the movies of the past, I’m on about the original ballads too.
Any self-respecting Englishman will know that Scott’s take on Robin is a pile.

As far as the story goes, sadly, what Ridley Scott and his team of ‘writers’ decided to do, is steal all of the most inaccurate ideas from all of the other Robin Hood films of the past 100 years.
Then they decided to confusingly modge them all into a giant cake full of disappointment.

It has absolutely nothing to do with the original legend.

I understand that Scott wanted to update the legend but I’m afraid it just didn’t work.
　
The movie as it is though, is actually quite entertaining, the action is pretty well choreographed and exciting, but that’s about it.
The acting is about standard for the type of movie, it’s not bad, but nothing that should win awards.
Think Gladiator but without the charisma.

The only thing that’s really going for the film is that it’s fairly close to being historically accurate with it’s look and feel.
Now, I’m not an expert, but I am a student of history and I know that Scott’s movie is relatively close with setting, props, character attitudes, costume and even the accents.
Russell Crowe was hammered by film buffs for his accent when the film came out. I will defend him though, he’s not far off the truth.
I guess these critics know little of English history.

The sequence of events is a load of tosh though, which lets down the only thing the film has going for it: Accuracy.
　
All in all an entertaining movie if you know nothing of Robin Hood, for me, it’s worse than Costner’s accent.
My rating 15%, solely for the historical feel

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)
rating_1

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:39 PM

Batman Begins

At first, I was extremely dubious about a reboot of the Batman franchise. After the debacle of Schumacher’s attempts I really thought the franchise in the movie world was dead and buried.

Christopher Nolan really has proved me wrong.

Batman Begins is literally that, how he becomes the Bat. Borrowing from the source material (the comics) and some of Burton’s Batman too, mixing in a few new things and an updated selection of Bat-Gadgets on the Utility-Belt, Batman Begins really hits the nail on the head on how to make a super-hero movie.

It revolves around Bruce Wayne’s parents being murdered and the subsequent slump of self-pity and depression he falls into over the following years.
After a soul-searching trek-of-the-world and studying various martial arts forms and getting into trouble with the law in various countries, he comes across an Illuminati who call themselves The League Of Shadows.
He’s trained in their forms of fighting and secrecy and eventually returns to Gotham City with the full intent of using his new found mentality and skills to strike fear into those who prey on the fearful.
Awaiting him though, are forces he cannot comprehend.

The movie is very well shot.
The Gothic feel of past Batman movies has been dropped slightly, it’s more brooding and moody than being Gothic.

The action feels a little held back but when it gets going, it really goes well. The filmmakers had the sense to make the action ‘just enough’ rather than going into the first movie with all guns blazing. It’s very cleverly put together.

The acting also is fantastic.
Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne/Batman is a brilliant choice. Some people say he’s a little too gruff when speaking his lines as Batman but I think he does the job well. He plays his naivety well at the beginning too. Bale took the physically demanding role so seriously, he bulked up his muscle mass too much and ended up having to actually lose some weight before they could fit the Bat-Suit.
Michael Caine as Wayne’s Butler, Alfred, is a perfect choice. He’s warm, funny, engaging and down to earth and is tough when needed. Alfred’s character this time round is more human too. He doesn’t beat around the bush when telling Bruce the truth. Caine is fantastic.
Gary Oldman as Detective Gordon is a marvel. He looks and acts like he’s jumped directly from the page of the comic book. Absolutely brilliant.

The only thing that lets the movie down is Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes (Bruce’s long time friend). She’s only on screen for a short time but you feel she’s just an add on, even when the character is placed in jeopardy. Holmes gives an apt performance, but Holmes herself just feels out of place.
As too is Cillian Murphy. Like Holmes, he plays the character well, you just feel as though another actor could have done it better.

The little cliff-hanger at the end between Batpants and Gordon really makes you yearn to watch the sequel.

All in all a near perfect starter for a super-hero franchise.
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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:39 PM

The Dark Knight

This movie is the defining point of the franchise so far.

It’s based around The Joker and his unbending need for destruction. He’s been hired by the various mob bosses of Gotham to take out Batman. The Bat has basically destroyed their businesses and had most of their employees locked away.

The mob didn’t count on how incredibly dangerous and unhinged The Joker turns out to be. In the words of Alfred: "Some men just want to watch the world burn."

Again, the movie is shot perfectly, this time round they used IMAX cameras to give the screen a depth to it. It looks beautiful and detailed.

The broody feel of the first movie is still there, though it’s toned down slightly. The movie feels more open to the visual aspect of a real city.

The expansion of certain characters is worked on, especially Gordon. You see how he goes from being a standard cop to the 'Commissioner Gordon' we all know and love.
As too is Alfred, though it’s brief, there is a small insight to his background.
The writing is fantastically put together.

The Joker’s evil twist on literally pitting everyone against everyone is an absolute masterclass in how to write a real villain.

The way The Joker destroys Harvey Dent at a personal level is very well conceived.

As for the acting…
Star turns again from Bale, Oldman and Caine. Katie Holmes is replaced by Maggie Gyllenhaal, a wise move.
There’s a wonderful turn from Aaron Eckhart too, who acts both of his roles absolutely perfectly as ‘Gotham’s White Knight’ Harvey Dent.

Now, The Joker, played by the late Heath Ledger is something I was dubious about before I saw the movie.
Everyone was raving about his part in the movie and I couldn’t help but think, "It’s only because he died not long after making it". I was never a fan of Ledger or his movies, to be honest, I thought he was a mediocre actor at best.

After seeing the film, I hold my hands up now.

I was wrong.

Heath Ledger, who made it to #2 in my top 40 Villains, is by far the best thing in the movie.

Ledger spent a month in isolation in a hotel room with the script, just acting out the role before shooting even began.

You can tell too. He’s seriously uneasy to watch though at times he’s funny too.
The humour is more of a dark, black humour than the comic-book-Cesar Romero-Nicholson humour that we’re all used to.

Ledger’s portrayal of a hyperactive, giggling psychopath is almost primordial and is very disturbing. Especially his eyes and the little ‘ticks’ he occasionally shows.

As ledger, he’s completely unrecognisable. He is The Joker.

All in all, better than the first and even if Batman isn’t your thing, it’s worth watching for Ledger’s performance.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:42 PM

The Dark Knight Rises

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/8/83/Dark_knight_rises_poster.jpg/220px-Dark_knight_rises_poster.jpg
Bruce Wayne, still suffering after the aftermath of TDK, has locked himself away from public eye for near a decade. He doesn't socialise, nor does he have a life.
His existence is based around regret and remorse and the inability to move on from the past.
When a new and more deadly enemy of Gotham surfaces, he is called into action by the people he respects more than anyone else... and in the process he hopes to gain closure on his Ghosts... and makes a few new allies as well.

The third and final Nolan Bat sees an incredibly detailed screenplay brought together with awesome action and an almost perfect story arc. Some scenes are hard to watch, it's the first real beating that the viewer sees the Bat take.

The movie does have faults, but not many. The main thing is that it's not exactly universal. If you haven't seen the first two... don't bother with this one until you have.

The other thing, is the overly used action shots in TDKR's trailers. The movie actually isn't an all out guns blazing blast-em-up from beginning to end. There are a number of plot setups and quieter scenes throughout that give the entire film and some wonderfully playful plot twists throughout... that give a completely different edge over it's predecessors.
Ignore the trailers, they give completely the wrong impression.

The filmmakers have actually managed the impossible task of finishing a movie series properly. There are some things within the storytelling that some viewers and Batfans won't like, but as you watch the film, you can't help but be swept up the the sheer excitment of witnessing the climax of Batman's story.

The ending is also extremely heart-pounding, it wraps up the trilogy perfectly and is brilliantly concieved.
My heart is still racing now, the movie ended about half an hour ago.

The action is based mainly around the third act and a little of the second act but it's very well put together. It edges more towrd the fantastical side of the Batman Comics but still has the brilliant real world flavour of the first two movies.
It's also highly exciting and very, very explosive.

Not much to say about the acting that hasn't been said in my other two reviews of Nolan's Bat.

Tom Hardy however, is fabulous as Bane. He's not just a piece of meat to give Batman a kicking. He's like a cross between a bulldozer and The Joker and Hardy is absolutely fantastic in the role. His voice is a little hard to get used to at first, but after he recites a few lines, you get used to it.

All in all... the finest end to a movie series I have yet to see. History has been made.
I even shed a few tears at the end through sheer joy, and the privilege of seeing the best Bat Series put to screen getting the ending it deserved.
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)
5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:43 PM

The Matrix.

An original take on alternate realities, The Matrix revolves around a computer hacker calling himself ‘Neo’, who feels that something isn’t right with the world he lives in.
A group of strangely dressed and oddly acting people appear in his life and explain that they can ‘free’ him from the constraints of a humdrum life and can explain to him exactly what this concept of The Matrix is.

He takes up their offer and falls into a world of intrigue and mystery and super-human powers.
Eventually he unwillingly realises that he will become the most powerful of these people and will lead them to victory in an ongoing war that’s taking place in another reality between man and machine.

The movie as a whole is very well put together. It keeps the air of mystery going throughout the entire running time. The audience follows Neo’s journey of discovery brilliantly. The ideas of the discoveries are kept under wraps until Neo discovers them, putting the viewer on a par with the character’s surprise and shock.

The effects too are fantastically developed. The first movie of it’s kind, on a par with Jurassic Park, the filmmakers actually invented certain technologies to make their vision come to life and in the process they coined the phrase "Bullet Time".

The filmmakers went toward a lot of practical effects too, rather than just full on CGI.
The entire film is also cutting edge in its design, especially some of the plotlines.

The acting is absolutely bang on too.
Keanu Reeves really hits his role with perfection. With the movie being such a far out idea, he really encapsulates the lost-puppy persona needed for Neo.
Lawrence Fishburn is marvellous as Morpeus. The leader of the group who take Neo on his journey. He’s the epitome of cool.
Hugo Weaving is fantastic as the otherworldly and emotionless villain Agent Smith. He made it to #33 in my Top 40 Villains.

The one fault with the movie is that it’s extremely serious. There’s little in the way of humour or respite in the depressed feelings of the characters.

All in all it’s a brilliant sci-fi-mystery ride into a different yet also very recognisable world.
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)
4.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:43 PM

Matrix Reloaded.

This is where things already started to go awry for the Matrix franchise.

The movie revolves around Neo again. This time he’s become an all-powerful super human and has unlocked his mind from ‘reality’.
Agent Smith is up to his old tricks and has learned a few new techniques for defeating Neo from within The Matrix and outside of it too.
The premise is that of the first movie, an ongoing war between man and machine and a twist in the story for the human city called Zion.

The movie is orientated toward action and flashy imagery more than anything else.
There is expansion in the storyline with Neo’s new missions and an introduction to the human city of Zion and new characters are introduced to the story but it feels extremely linear.

The special effects are an improvement to an extent but a lot of it has been turned from practical camera use, into full on CG scenes that show a lot of break up as they’re not rendered brilliantly. Some of it is, but most of it isn’t.

What made The Matrix such a success was the development of things the audience had never seen before. This movie just feels like a typical Hollywood sequel: Flashy and hollow.

The action is exciting though, it’s well choreographed, but it’s just too CG to be anywhere near as exciting as the more practical first movie.
The martial arts scenes with Neo are probably the best part of the whole movie though, a lot of work went into the fights and Reeves really shows his worth as an action star.

The acting again though is bang on the money. The addition of the new characters and new sub-plots broadens the scope of the movie.

All in all a vast and sprawling action-up with a stretched out story that is exciting at times, but it’s just too much like an expensive cartoon.
My rating 75%

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)
4

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:44 PM

Matrix Revolutions.

The third of the franchise revolves more around the war outside of The Matrix, rather than Neo and the group’s interactions within The Matrix.

Neo’s new mission is to take on Agent Smith’s new found super powers and make a pact with the machines, as Smith is now becoming a serious threat to them too.
Cue a big showdown both inside and outside The Matrix that lasts most of the movie’s running time.

The problem is that the movie has no real mystery to it anymore.
The plotline is very, very linear: The characters have an idea, they make it happen, then move onto the next idea and so on. After the first half-hour you feel bored with it all and are hoping for the ending to come along.

The CG is extremely heavy again but this time it’s utilised with much more thought. It’s more reality based than being an expensive cartoon, so thumbs up for that.

The action too, though heavily CG is actually very entertaining and much more exciting than the second movie, especially during the fighting in Zion.

The Neo/Smith CGI laden showdown however is a bit of a letdown. The filmmakers went for style rather than substance and it feels very hollow.

The actors are starting to look a little tired of it all too. They do there jobs well, but the charisma and energy they had in the first two movies has somewhat diminished.

All in all, better effects than the first two, a few extra sub-plots and much more exciting in the action scenes, but not really a great end to what started out so promisingly.
My rating is the same as the second movie at 75%

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)
4

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:45 PM

Troll Hunter

A third change from the above list. I saw Troll Hunter when it was first released but saw it again the other day and had to let everyone know what I thought.
I’ve watched the movie in both formats i.e.; In Norwegian with English subtitles and also in redubbed English.

Another movie based on ‘found footage’ reveals three 20 somethings making a documentary about a hunter who is illegally shooting bears in Norway find themselves thrown into a world of Norwegian mythology when they decide to follow the hunter in question.
It turns out that this hunter is actually a troll hunter working for a secret government system and he takes the three filmmakers on a trip of terror and discovery in the wilderness of northern Europe.

The films premise is sound, basing it in real life situations is a mark of originality by the filmmakers but the movie itself mainly falls flat after that.
The only other redeeming features of the film are the CG trolls. Though the movie is relatively low budget, the CGI is exceptionally well rendered and very original. They utilise existing mythology too with the look of the creatures which adds authenticity as well.

The acting in the film is sadly, lacklustre at best. It’s very wooden and obviously scripted. There’s no naturalness with the dialogue either.

The physical reactions of the cast are also very scripted which is another sad part of the film, it destroys the aura of reality that the film is trying desperately to build.

There are also sections of the plot that are based on what the filmmakers had to work with due to low budget.
A side effect of this is that certain plot elements are unintentionally laugh-out-loud funny, anyone who has already seen the movie will know what I’m talking about when I say "Electrical Pylons".

All in all a well rendered CG film when the CGI is actually used. Sadly, it’s unintentionally funny, badly acted and certainly not worth the £16 that I paid for it on DVD.
My rating 10%

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)
0.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:45 PM

John Carpenter’s The Fog.

As a small American fishing town prepares to celebrate the 100th anniversary of it’s completion, strange and disturbing things start occurring just after midnight on the anniversary when a strange glowing fog rolls in from the ocean.
Car alarms start going off, animals become disturbed, gold coins transform into pieces of wood and a fishing boat is found adrift at sea with all the crewmembers either dead or missing.
During the incidents’ occurrences, a Priest finds a diary that was written by his Grandfather at the time of the town’s completion. It contains disturbing and upsetting stories of murder and theft that lead to the town’s beginnings 100 years before.

The movie is an absolute entertainer. Carpenter’s writing is extremely well put together.
His take on a simple ghost story is incredibly original.

The effects are very rudimentary, it’s mainly fog and lights, but work absolutely brilliantly. Rob Bottin’s creations are simple, gory, dark and at times are quite disturbing when seen. They’re kept to the shadows and are hidden behind fog most of the time too, which gives the scary moments more impact.

The acting too is top notch. There’s no actual lead role as such, it’s more along the lines of various town’s folk in their own survival story.
An incredibly sexy Adrienne Barbeau, Scream-Queen Jamie Lee-Curtis, John Houseman and Janet Leigh are all on top form as the runners, screamers and hiders.
The thing that let’s the movie down? Not a lot really, as usual with Carpenter he makes his own soundtrack for the movie and it’s far from being his best.

All in all a cracking little horror that keeps things small-scale and is very atmospheric.
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)
rating_5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:47 PM

Evolution

After a meteor crash lands into Glen Canyon, all sorts of strange and weird creatures start appearing in the local area. It’s up to two college professors Ira Kane and Harry Block who were the first to discover the meteor’s secrets and Dr Allison Reed (a military employee), to find out what these things are and find a way how to stop a possible invasion. Along with a witness to the crash, Wayne Grey, they head out into the local town to discover new, alien life forms.
Involved is the U.S Army, lead by an old colleague of Kane’s, Brigadier General Woodman, whose hardheaded ways may put a dampener on the foursome’s plans of research and prevention.

It’s an extremely funny piece of filmmaking. Like with a lot of Ivan Rietman’s movies, it starts out relatively real, then heads down a path of unreal and very funny situations.
It’s also very well put together on the discovery front too, the audience is kept in the frame when it comes to finding out about the alien creatures involved.

The acting is a surprise.
Julianne Moore as Dr Reed is a surprise in a comedic role. She’s absolutely bang on with the theme of the movie.
Orlando Jones is his funny too as Professor Block, he carries the cheeky, wisecracking character well.
Seann William Scott as Wayne Grey is his usual self too, wacky, funny, occasionally slapstick.
The biggest surprise is David Duchovny as Dr Kane. Duchovny has shown signs of comedic timing before but in the movie he’s absolutely brilliant as the serious doctor who’s comedy comes from being occasionally cheeky and down to earth in a set of strange circumstances. The X-Files actor also lends himself to the theme brilliantly.

The special effects are another welcome surprise, the CGI is absolutely tip top.
The creatures involved in the film are also very original, with some bordering on comedic themselves. You can tell the filmmakers had a lot of fun with the creatures.

All in all, it’s a fun, funny movie with tongue in cheek comedy, great CGI and also seriousness thrown in too for good measure.
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)
4.5

Swan

06-05-14, 09:47 PM

Aliens Vs Predator 2: Requiem

rating_3_5

:|

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:48 PM

The Day After Tomorrow

An American weather scientist makes the most important discovery of our time when strange storms start happening all over the planet. The usual happens with this sort of thing, nobody listens to him, especially when he says a Superstorm is coming and will kill almost everything in the Northern Hemisphere.
As it happens, his son is trapped in New York as the Superstorm strikes the Northern Hemisphere and he braves the extreme weather by trekking across America on foot to save his son.
Hence a big ‘told you so’ and a thumbs down for the U.S Government.

That’s really about as far as the plot goes and it’s carried out as well as it could have been.
The film is the usual Emmerich disaster film that shows various landmarks of America being smashed and hammered by natural disaster.

The movie borders at times on laugh out loud funny, but it’s unintentional sadly. Some of the ‘science’ used is cod at best and the dialogue is rip-roaringly cheesy.
If the viewer was to watch the film and imagine it as a spoof, it’s actually much more fun than watching it as a seriously made film.
It’s also extremely stereotypical with the portrayal of anything outside of the USA, which is another Emmerich touch that’s seen in Independence Day and 2012.

The effects are top notch though and they’re actually quite thrilling to watch. The action too is pretty well choreographed and exciting, especially when tidal waves hit New York.

The acting sadly is pretty substandard. Jake Gyllenhaal is wooden and unbelievable as Dennis Quaid’s son.
Dennis Quaid is probably the best of the lot, though he has a look on his face that says "Why am I doing this?"
Still though, he hits his mark professionally.

All in all it’s a popcorn brainless CGI adventure that promises lots of flash, tries to have an air of scientific depth to it but simply just delivers, well, flashy CGI adventures and funny dialogue.
My rating 65%

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)
3.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:50 PM

Critters 2: The Main Course

Once again Grover's Bend is attacked by the vicious, hungry little creatures. This time, some eggs left behind from the first movie have hatched just as Brad Brown returns to his home town, 2 years after the events of the first movie.
This time round, the Bounty Hunters have also returned and have brought Charlie back with them too.

The movie is definitely a product of bad writing and production.
It tries to be bigger than the first film in the action stakes and expands the overall event to the entire town, rather than the 'trapped in house' horror that the first film made so well.

You might think it would be a good thing to do this, if it were simply a re-run of the first film's plot it would simply be a cash in sequel.
Sadly though, the wooden acting, childlike writing and the dropping of the horror genre for a more comedy orientated basis make for a very poor night in with a DVD.

Many of the original ideas from the first film have also been dropped. There's no continuity in the sequel.
There are also massive plot holes in regard to the town's folk when they refer to the events of the original movie.

The puppetry is one good point. They're brilliantly modelled yet feel different to the first movie in the way they 'act'.
The overall effects though aren't improved from the first. If anything, they're worse.

All in all, a terrible sequel to a cracking little build up.
My rating 15%

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)
1

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:51 PM

Critters 3

After hitching a ride on the underside of a family's truck, the malicious little monsters find themselves inside the family's crummy apartment block in the city, surrounded by various disparate residents of the apartments.
It's up to the residents to find a way to hide and fight and find a way to save themselves.
Charlie once again shows up to aid the hapless victims.

It's a better film than the second movie. The writing feels as though more time has been taken and the plot is a little closer to the first film with the claustrophobic 'haunted house' genre.
The acting is another plus point. Though cheesy at times and wooden on occasion, it's far better than the second film.

There is a nice subplot with the main family though. It's a broken home storyline with Dad, Daughter and Son having to reconcile their differences.

Bit part actress Frances Bay makes a nice appearance as an elderly lady in the block.
Leonardo Di Caprio makes his feature film debut too. He's certainly at his usual. His acting is exactly the same as modern day.

The creatures look has been altered for this film too. They're more cartoony and feel more viewer friendly, almost as if the filmmakers were trying to appeal to a younger audience, though with the plot and writing being the way it is, I'm not sure it's right for kids.
Bit of a miss affair really to do that.

Another bad point though is the constant background music, like the kind you find in a TV movie. It's badly written and even in the quieter scenes, it's still very prominent.

All in all it's a vast improvment on the awful second movie but nowhere near the original.
My rating 55%

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)
3

The Rodent

06-05-14, 09:51 PM

Critters 4

Charlie has found himself frozen in suspended animation with a bunch of Crite eggs by his side. When he is awakened from his slumber, many years have passed and he finds himself in space, on a salvage ship with a small crew.
The eggs of course have hatched and it's up to Charlie to explain to the crew what's going on and help find a way to survive.

This is the final nail in the Critters coffin. After the third film's improvement over the second film, this one for some reason decided to go for full on comedy mixed with bad humour, cliche plotlines, gimmicky ideas and terrible acting.

The movie as a whole feels very much like Jason X with the hammy/wooden/talentless acting and the plot setting. The writing and effects feel like an extremely low budgetted TV movie too.

What makes the movie almost watchable though is that it knows it's terrible.
The filmmakers excel in utilising the fact that their movie is a complete pile and it actually makes for an entertaining, tongue in cheek, knowingly bad sci-fi.

Brad Douriff is about the best part of it all though. He's cheesy and at his usual self.

All in all, it's knowingly bad but still relatively entertaining because of this. Nowhere near as good as the third or the original, but still better than the second film.
My rating 30%

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)
1.5

The Rodent

06-05-14, 10:06 PM

Phew! Should be done now. Updated list of my reviews after all that rubbish :D

PAGE 1
1 - Young Guns 90%
2 - A Nightmare On Elm Street (2010 Remake) 2%
3 – 2012 15%
4 - Cowboys And Aliens 85%
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 Of Horrors 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%
PAGE 35
200 – Judgment Night 93% [200th Review, 270th Movie]
PAGE 36
201 - Close Encounters Of The Third Kind 101%
PAGE 37
202 - The Bone Collector 68%
PAGE 38
203 - The Star Trek Franchise - 2 Part Rodent’s Revisited and Star Trek Into Darkness 97%
PAGE 39
204 - Chopper 93% [274]
PAGE 40
205 - Pan’s Labyrinth 101%
206 - House Of The Dead 0% [276]
PAGE 41
207 - Kick-Ass Duo 92% & 92%
208 - One Hour Photo 92%
209 - Lawless 97% [280]
210 - Prisoners 100% [281]
PAGE 42
211 - Coraline 99%
PAGE 43
212 - TRON 100% [283]
213 - TRON Legacy 100%
214 - Starman 100%
215 - X-Men: Days Of Future Past 98% [286]

PAGE 43 - PAGE 49
Repeated Reviews Of Franchises And Double Review Posts For The New MoFo Reviews Page

The Rodent

06-09-14, 11:01 PM

Review #216, Movie #287
World War Z

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/dc/World_War_Z_poster.jpg

Year Of Release
2013

Director
Marc Forster

Producer/s
Brad Pitt, Dede Gardner, Jeremy Kleiner, Ian Bryce

Writer/s
Matthew Michael Carnahan, Drew Goddard, Damon Lindelof, J Michael Straczynski

Cast
Brad Pitt, Daniella Kertesz, Mireille Enos, Sterling Jerins, Abigail Hargrove, Fana Mokoena and David Morse

Notes
After the novel was written and published in 2006, a year later Brad Pitt's company Plan B went head to head with Leonardo DiCaprio's company Appian Way in a bidding war for rights to the make the film.
Novelist Max Brooks had absolutely no input on the film either, but was in favour of Pitt over DiCaprio and supported the changes made from book-film transition.

---

Synopsis:
Gerry Lane, a retired UN Investigator, has been spending the past while with his Children as a house Husband, while his Wife goes to work to support them financially.
One morning though, their lives change radically when it appears a virus of some kind is turning people into Zombies.

Gerry must do everything he can to ensure the safety of his family...

... but when the Government calls him back on to duty, Gerry must use every resource he has, and his wits, to save not just his Wife and Children, but also the entire World.

---

Review:
Slammed by some (mainly those who read the book first) and given a thumbs up by others... but WWZ as far as I can tell hasn't managed to garner any actual lovers of the film.
It's a bit of an odd one this...

What the film is, is a solidly pieced together mystery, backed up by some of the best acting in a Zombie movie I've seen, and a ton of action to back it up.
The film then goes into almost the original Resident Evil style haunted house genre in the third act.

As a whole, the film is one long thrill ride of Zombified Gore and never lets up in terms of tension. It's very on-the-edge-of-the-seat exciting from start to end.

Most Zombie movies are labelled as Horrors from the get-go though, but many are just gore fests or Milla Jovovich smashing heads together... World War Z really is a Horror Movie.

It's well crafted in delivery of frights, is nicely toned when it comes to the peril that the characters get in, and the general writing allows you to learn the characters as the film progresses, which adds a little more to the mystery aspects as the characters begin to show their traits.
The film has pretty much everything in terms of the Horror genre; frights, shock, gore, atmosphere, jumpy bits, paranoia, claustrophobia and a few original ideas when it comes to the creatures as well in terms of their traits.
There are a few quieter scene involved too, which adds a sense of realism to the proceedings. It's not just all out smash'em action.

The way they get from act two into the third act is contrived though, even though the third act is a wonderfully playful series of hide-behind-your-cushion scenes.

The acting though as I said is probably the best I've seen in a Zombie movie.

Brad Pitt as Gerry Lane is brilliantly intelligent. You really believe this guy is a professional at what he does, a Government Investigator.
When he's around his family too is brilliantly played by Pitt. His protective nature toward his family is spot on... even when he near attempts suicide for their protection.

Mireille Enos as Gerry's Wife Karin is also spot on, though she's not seen a massive amount after the first act. She spend most of her time with the kids when Gerry is off across the Globe investigating the virus.
Sterling Jerins and Abigail Hargrove play the Lane Children. Both are similar to Enos in that they aren't seen a huge amount after Gerry goes off on his adventure. Both are good though amongst the chaos and hold the characters well.

Daniella Kertesz plays Segen, an Israeli Soldier who becomes a stalwart pal of Gerry's. Kertesz is great throughout and is key to the plot at a couple points... sadly, she's not really utilised as well as she could have been.

Backup comes from Fana Mokoena, James Badge Dale, Ludi Boeken, Matthew Fox and David Morse. Morse's character is really a non-character though.

As for the action... top marks. There's a lot of CGI involved, however the choreography and photography within the practical effects and the makeup and Zombie effects are outstanding.
The filmmakers have also utilised a style of movement and choreography for the creatures that adds a huge sense of threat and makes your toes really curl when the action gets going.

---

All in all... strong, but far from perfect. Some of the characters aren't used very well, and there's a couple of contrived scenes that slap the realistic nature of the film down a few pegs.
However, for a Zombie movie, it's one of the best modern ones going. Full of great scares, great atmosphere and some really well pieced together connections between the audience and the characters and the action and brilliant effects make it stand out from the crowd.

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)
rating_4_5

cricket

06-09-14, 11:04 PM

I'm going to watch World War Z after the 70's craze. I liked 28 Weeks Later an awful lot; is it anything like that?

The Rodent

06-09-14, 11:08 PM

Pretty close tbh. WWZ is a better film overall though.

cricket

06-09-14, 11:17 PM

That's what I thought when I saw the trailer. I thought it looked good, but people seemed to want to crap on it like they wanted it to fail.

Captain Spaulding

06-10-14, 02:44 AM

I didn't like the movie or the book.

The Rodent

06-10-14, 03:46 AM

Review #217, Movie #288
Night Of The Living Dead

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d1/Night_of_the_Living_Dead_affiche.jpg

Year Of Release

1968

Director
George A Romero

Producer/s
Karl Hardman, Russell Streiner

Writer/s
George A Romero, John A Russo

Cast

Duane Jones, Judith O’Dea, Karl Hardman, Marilyn Eastman, Keith Wayne, Bill “Chilly Billy” Cardille and Kyra Schon

Notes

The reason Night was initially made was that Romero, Russo and Streiner, who had their own production company were growing bored with making commercials and decided that Hollywood’s “thirst” for bizarre films was the best way to go.

Upon raising $6,000 between themselves and 7 other people they went to work, only to find that more money was needed. Eventually they pooled what they had and raised $114,000 for the film under the name Image Ten Productions due to the 10 production members who were involved.

Most of the Zombified locals in the film are friends and family of George A Romero and other members of Image Ten, with the low budget being spent mainly on makeup effects and some helicopter shots. The small budget also lead to Romero using cheap 35mm black and white film, which in the end, actually makes the film look more memorable.

---

Synopsis:
Barbra and her Brother Johnny go to the cemetery on their annual visit to see their Father.
When strangely acting people appear in the distance, Johnny teases Barbra about how they're "after her"...

But Johnny was more right than they would hope when these people suddenly attack them, and Barbra has to flee for her life...

Review:
OK, it's very easy just to harp on about how this film is a Classic, and I will be at some point...

However, the film is packed with a number of inconsistencies, continuity errors, and a few naïve mistakes and almost experimental filmmaking in terms of being one of the earliest creature features.

But putting that aside, this film is the Granddaddy of the modern Horror Genre and gave movie fans the Zombie Genre to boot.

Copied many a time, the original Resident Evil videogame for a start, using the "Haunted House" theme is a prime example along with Shyamalan's Signs... but also, what was seen at the time as a brave move in casting.
Duane Jones as the Hero Ben was controversial at the time, yet according to Romero, he was cast simply due to his audition being the best. In Hindsight, Romero broke the mould and moved cinematic taboos beyond words.

The film itself though, along with the naivety, is ground-breaking in its simplicity. The low budget allows for a raw, gritty and atmospheric film that throws the viewer into a claustrophobic adventure full of, I'll coin a phrase here, "mysterious psychological Horror"... meaning, the Horror comes from not knowing what it is that's actually happening to the world outside the boarded up windows of the house.

It'd also be easy to just point out that the film is quite literally just a small group of people in a house, things outside want to get in and there's some occasional gore.
The simplicity really doesn't affect the film though. Romero's execution of the simple screenplay and script and getting some brilliant, realistic emotion from the actors involved makes the Horror and weird goings-on even more potent.

Which brings me to the acting.
Duane Jones as Ben is a mark of genius. This is by far one of the strongest leading roles I've seen in such a low budget film. Not only is this Jones' first film, he only made 8 films altogether in his career but wow... and all from a guy who was actually an Art Director by trade.

Judith O'Dea also shines in what was one of only a couple roles she ever played. She's more of the typical Damsel in distress after seeing her Brother get chomped but O'Dea makes an absolute legend of a character that has lived in the minds of the populous for nearly 50 years. The fact that O'Dea really didn't like Horror Films as they scared her, shows in her performance too.

We're also treated to Karl Hardman, Marilyn Eastman and Kyra Schon as the Cooper family. Karl Hardman in particular makes for an almost antagonist role, constantly coming to loggerheads with everyone around him.

Keith Wayne, Judith Ridley and Russell Streiner make up the rest of the group. All give a decent show and make the cramped spaces even more edgy and unbearable.

As for action and effects etc. Again, the low budget gives a different edge than other Zombie films.
Rather than shock factor, the small cramped spaces in the house, varying camera angles, music and lighting are used to create atmosphere alongside the edgy acting.
It makes the film universally recognisable and when some of the gory stuff does start kicking in it gives a bigger impact.
Top stuff.

---

All in all, the Granddaddy of the Zombie Genre.
Seen often as a Cult Film but made a star of George A Romero and has stood the test of time for nearly 50 years.

Low budget and filmed in Black And White, the edginess of the film comes from the acting and sheer style of photography and never lets up in terms of tension and atmosphere. Romero really knew how to utilise what he had to work with.

A true Classic.

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)
rating_5

cricket

06-10-14, 08:58 AM

A true classic is right; it's one of the first movies I can remember watching as a child.

The Rodent

06-11-14, 12:28 AM

Review #218, Movie #289
Dawn Of The Dead

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/63/Dawn_of_the_dead.jpg

Year Of Release

1978

Director

George A Romero

Producer/s

Richard P Rubinstein, Claudio Argento, Alfredo Cuomo

Writer/s

George A Romero

Cast

David Emge, Ken Foree, Gaylen Ross, Scott Reiniger and Tom Savini

Notes

This was Romero’s first collaboration with makeup maestro Tom Savini. Savini was offered the job for Night Of The Living Dead in 1968 but had to turn Romero down through being drafted into the Vietnam War.

Effects expert Savini thought that the blood used in the film was too bright and almost luminous, which according to sources was actually down to a mistake on behalf of the production team… but Romero actually ran with it and talked Savini round due to the comic nature of the blood adding to the comic nature of the film.

The thing to remember about Romero's Dead Series, is that they aren't direct sequels of one another, they're more "spiritual" sequels. As the films progress, the state of decomposition of society does too, but each film should be considered "stand alone".

---

Synopsis:
After only 3 weeks of a deadly virus taking over the World, Governments and Local Police have become unable to control the situation of flesh eating Zombies.
TV Station workers Stephen and Francine see the future is glum and steal the Network's Helicopter and head out of town, on the way, they meet Roger and Peter, two members of a SWAT Team who have gone AWOL due to the fact that society is failing and the Police Force has pretty much failed already...

... and the four end up finding a Shopping Mall that is devoid of any living people.

Review:
With a bigger budget, about 6 times that of Night, though by reckoning the 10 year gap probably makes it about equal due to inflation, Romero has been able to put to screen a more (ahem) fleshed out story combined with some extra action.

It's also the film that has been parodied, copied and even remade more times than the other Dead films. Has never been bettered though.

What's different really, is that the film feels like and extension of the first, yet bares no resemblance at all.

There's more guts and gore this time round. The film in places feels like an exploitation film in regards to some of the scenes. It feels as though Romero has told the various Zombified extras and stuntmen to stand still and stare just past the camera while they get a good shot of the gore and brains falling out their freshly shot foreheads.
It does add a much different aura to the film than anything really seen before, but gladly, not every action scene or gory scene in the film is laden heavily with exploitative amounts blood and goo.

The general screenplay and story this time round has in hindsight started the trend of Zombie Apocalypse conversations that take place mainly between teenaged boys.
Survivors hiding in a Mall.
It works really, really well too. A couple scenes are a little contrived and some of the filmmaking is still experimental, but the special thing is that it makes the film, like Night, universally recognisable.
There's also a subtle undertone of Consumerism, Anti-Consumerism and satire toward the mentality of people who buy for the sake of buying and what it all really means in the grand scheme of things.
It's cleverly put together.

The acting is also improved. This time round, actual actors, albeit at the start of their careers, were hired.

Ken Foree and Scott Reiniger play Peter Washington and Roger DiMarco respectively.
I wasn't sure about Reiniger to start with, he seems more like a last minute add-on even though he's the first main character we meet but he comes into his own eventually.
Foree though makes this movie. He plays the intelligence of the group. The wise man who leads them and protects the group. Foree is a little amateur at some of the action scenes though but it's fun to hear a heroic tune kick in when he starts getting physical.

David Emge and Gaylen Ross play Stephen Andrews and Francine Parker... together, the two portray almost the lost souls of the film. Completely out of their depth in the chaos and follow Peter and Roger for their own survival. In the Mall though is when they come into their own and become disparate personalities and Francine becomes almost a lifeline back to sanity for Stephen as he becomes lost in the life they're now leading.

The action, as I said, feels more like an exploitation in blood and gore at times.
The thing is though, it makes the film stand out. Not just from the original movie, but anything else too.
There's also more gunplay in this one and a handful of scenes with a gang of raiders in the Mall that adds some excitement.
As I said in the Notes as well, the blood and guts, and some of the sound effects too, have been almost caricatured and turned more toward a "comic" nature by the filmmakers and it makes the whole thing much more fun to watch amongst some of the scares. This film though is much less scary than the first.

---

All in all, an improvement over the original in technical terms, but lacking the actual scares, psychological edge and spooky atmosphere.
It's still a romping gore fest though and contains much more humour and hints of satire amongst the blood and headshots.
There's also added action and some nicely played character dynamics and character arcs going on too.

Another Classic from George A Romero.

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)
rating_5

Derek Vinyard

06-11-14, 12:31 AM

you're review of World War Z , Night of the living dead and Dawn of the dead are pretty awesome ! totally agree with you ! continue like this it's pretty interresting to read your though !

The Rodent

06-11-14, 12:36 AM

Thanks Buddy!! :up:

Glad it's working, I've made an ever so slight change to how I write and it seems to be working :D

The Rodent

06-11-14, 03:24 AM

Review #219, Movie #290
Day Of The Dead

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7e/Day_of_the_Dead_%28film%29_poster.jpg

Year Of Release

1985

Director

George A Romero

Producer

Richard P Rubinstein

Writer

George A Romero

Cast

Lori Cardille, Joseph Pilato, Terry Alexander, Richard Liberty, Jarlath Conroy and Sherman Howard

Notes

On the theme of keeping it between close friends and family, Lori Cardille, the lead in this film is the daughter of Bill “Chilly Willy” Cardille, who had a role as an extra in Romero’s original Night Of The Living Dead.

Main antagonist Joseph Pilato was also a friend and past co-worker of Romero’s as he had been in Dawn Of The Dead and Knightriders.

---

Synopsis:
A group of survivors hide out in an underground Government Lab. The group are split into two disparate parts, the first is a collection of Ex-Military guys lead by the despotic Captain Henry Jones, holding desperately onto their former way of life but managing to become a rag-tag bunch of undisciplined Ex-Soldiers.
The second part of the group are Civilians and Doctors made up of a Helicopter Pilot, a Radio Expert and a trio of Scientists who are working on a way to "train" the Zombies into becoming less aggressive.

But Captain Jones isn't happy, and declares a kind of Marshall Law if everyone in the facility doesn't do exactly what he commands.

Review:
Now we're talking.
For me, this is my favourite of the original trio of Dead Films, it was also the first of the three I watched as well back when I was a kid.
Looking at it now as an adult and reviewer, it takes the best parts of the first two films, the jumpy psychological scares, the action and bloodsoaked gore and the atmosphere of being in a cramped environment... and combines a heavier hand of the exploitation of blood and guts and then, wraps the whole lot up into a slightly newer setting of isolation with paranoia.

This one definitely feels much more fleshed out than the first two. In a mirror of history, this one has a budget of 6 times the second film... and it really shows too.
The general aura of the film is more about the breakdown of society within a small group and is the epitome of Stephen King's "As a species we're fundamentally insane. Put more than two of us in a room and we pick sides and dream up ways to kill each other" quote (though the film isn't based on that obviously, I'm just using it as reference).

It's definitely the most interesting psychologically of the original 3 films in that term.

The other thing that makes its mark is the paranoia that builds up. You're never really sure what the main antagonists (Military guys) are up to or what Captain Jones will suddenly decide to do next.
It's an interesting dynamic for the main group of protagonists that the viewer is rooting for.
You get to care about, let's call them Good Guys, you get to care about the Good Guys... and it's all down to the fact that not only do you get to know them and their personalities within the first 15 minutes or so, but it's down to Jones and his Military guys being a bunch of thugs with guns and acting basically like power mad d*ckheads.

Romero draws a very clear line down the centre of the film with who is who, what is what and it allows for the viewer to just sit back and enjoy the ride without doing to much thinking.

As for the acting...
Joseph Pilato plays Captain Jones... Pilato is more a campy, pantomime type villain... but he has a very serious edge to him that stands him apart from other similar styled villains like say, Alan Rickman in Die Hard.

His backup comes from Gary Howard Klar, Ralph Marrero, Phillip G Kellams, Taso N Stavrakis and Gregory Nicotero. Gary Howard Klar is the main of the bunch and he's perfect as the second in command brute-with-no-brains.

Our heroes are...
Lori Cardille as Dr Sarah Bowman. Cardille's not a perfect actress, but in this she's pretty on the money, especially when she's holding her ground against Pilato's bad guy.

Jarlath Conroy also makes a good showing as the Radio Tech Bill McDermott. He's held in the background more than I'd have liked but his character is the most likeable of the group of Heroes and he proves to be an asset to the group of actors too.

Terry Alexander is one of the best on show. He plays Chopper Pilot John. Alexander really nails the role perfectly and manages to be tough and funny at the same time.

Best on show though is by far Richard Liberty as Dr Matthew Logan, nicknamed Frankenstein because of his experiments on Zombies. Liberty plays a very underrated role throughout but is incredibly naturalistic.

Back up comes from Anthony Dileo Jr, John Amplas, and Sherman Howard makes a memorable show as "Bub".

The action and effects, like before, have been ramped up because of budget... but also tweaked to look more realistic as well.
The Zombie effects and makeup are top notch and seem to have been made the standard for pretty much every Zombie film since.

This time round like I said though, the blood and gore scenes are pretty much all for shock factor. Almost every scene involving a Zombie chomping someone has been given the OTT treatment, including having people pulled in half for the sake of it and having a Zombie being experimented on.
I like it though, it stands out and shows the imagination of the filmmakers alongside the new special effects techniques they were obviously learning and some of it is used to expand the legend of the Zombies.
There's also some animatronics going on too, some of which are brilliantly made.

The general atmosphere in the cramped facility is top drawer though and draws the viewer in.

---

All in all, my favourite of the first 3 films... packed with action and improved Zombie effects and has put back in some of those scares and jumpy bits that were lacking from Dawn.
The general atmosphere and psychological edge are also top notch.

I'd say this one was probably the best written too.

Another Classic though like Night and Dawn? Almost.

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)
rating_4_5

cricket

06-11-14, 10:14 AM

I only saw Day of the Dead once when it was out and didn't like it. Seeing how I love the first two, I should probably try it again.

The Rodent

06-11-14, 11:35 PM

Review #220, Movie #291
Land Of The Dead

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9e/Landofthedead.jpg

Year Of Release

2005

Director

George A Romero

Producer

Mark Canton, Bernie Goldman, Peter Grunwald

Writer

George A Romero

Cast

Simon Baker, Asia Argento, Robert Joy, Eugene Clark, Boyd Banks, Tom Savini, Phil Fondacaro, Shawn Roberts, John Leguizamo and Dennis Hopper

Notes

Another “keep it in the family” moment came with the casting of Asia Argento as the lead girl. Asia is the Niece of Claudio Argento, who was a producer on Dawn Of The Dead.

Simon Pegg and Edgar Wright, the main duo behind Shaun Of The Dead have bit parts as Zombies after Romero gave personal praise for their parody of the Zombie genre.

Stand-up Comedian Boyd Banks and Tom Savini make a show as well as various Zombies and extras… Banks in particular was also part of the Dawn Of The Dead remake a year earlier than this film in 2004, which also had cameos from the casts of Romero’s originals including Ken Foree in one of the best cameos I’ve seen.

In another throwback, Foree was also part of Edgar Wright’s and Simon Pegg’s Shaun Of The Dead when his name appeared as the name of a shop, Foree Electronics.

---

Synopsis:
A while after the Zombie Apocalypse, many outposts have been set up across the world.
One of which is in Pittsburgh, and like many others, it has a pecking order.
At the top of the food-chain (ahem), is Paul Kaufman, who has claimed himself as the ruler of the outpost and lives in almost solitude apart from a couple of Yes-Men who surround him.
Kaufman hand picks the upper classes (or people of importance from the past lives they once lead) to live in his high-rise apartment block at the centre of the Outpost living a life of luxury and blissful ignorance of the horrors outside...

... everyone else is either a worker who keeps the building going or a kind of hunter-gatherer who risks their life outside the Outpost by gathering goodies for the "rich people"...

... or failing that, they are forcefully kept out of the building by Kaufman's foot-soldiers and live in squalor in the sealed off slums below, all the while the borders are under threat of attack from the Zombie Hordes.

Review:
Ok... this is a modernised version of Romero's Zombie vision.

For a start, it's all very clinical and clean... in the sense of being not that daring and certainly not that experimental in terms of the filmmaking.

This film does follow in the footsteps of the first 3 in that the Apocalypse is farther along in time, yet even though it's tied to the original trio, it has very, very little additions in terms of expansion.

It feels more like an homage to the first 3 films with the bonus of a new effects crew and some CGI.
The Haunted House theme from Night and also the theme of having a Mall from Dawn as the basis of the story is nodded at with Kaufman's High-Rise building, there's the jumpy bits and scares thrown in too, and some realistic gore from the Day rather than the comic style of the second.
There's also the sociological aspect of having a clear and precise pecking order within the inhabitants of the Outpost, which feels like a nod again to Day.
It is lacking however in the satirical side of things, especially with how the Human Race tends to hang on the ownership of "stuff"... the people inside the building are never really built upon, which was a bit of a missed opportunity.

The humour is also mainly situational, as in, the odd line or two after a hint of action... rather than coming naturally from character traits.

One new thing though, is the film does build on and utilise another part of Dawn and Day... that Zombies can learn. The film uses a premise that came from Dawn when one of the characters hints that Zombies may have vague memories of their past lives, which is why they were attracted to the Mall... and we have the "main Zombie" who has seemingly remembered who he was and has realised what he has become, and starts using tools and even leading a group of Zombies toward the Outpost.

What is a little contrived though, is that this film has a MacGuffin. A pretty rubbish one too. The whole second and third acts are based around retrieving a vehicle. Hmm.

As for the acting... Romero has brought in some bigger names for this one rather than having unknowns in the leads.

Simon Baker is our Hero of the hour as Riley Denbo. Not much is built on in terms of character arc, just the odd hint of things he did in the past like helping out his stalwart friend Charlie.
Baker is good in the role though, he plays it straight and makes a likeable hero.

Asia Argento plays Slack... another "rescue" of Riley's and becomes a generic Female role for Baker to play off. Argento is fun though, and she plays a pretty tough but fallible cookie throughout.

John Leguizamo also plays it straight as Cholo DeMora... Baker's second in Command. His role is really the pivotal role in terms of the second and third acts when he steals the MacGuffin in question when he gets slighted by Kaufman. Leguizamo also plays a tough, unbending Soldier who actually has a soul at times which is nice for the character.

Robert Joy plays Riley's pal Charlie... absolutely brilliant. Joy takes what could have been a basic "best pal" role and turns on his talent and makes probably the most memorable role within the Dead Series. He even has a catchphrase of sorts: "All you have to do is look at me, and you can tell... [insert quip here]"
I loved Joy in this role.

The standout role though is by far the late great Dennis Hopper as Kaufman. Hopper's natural talent for being funny, slimy, tough and also fallible at the same time is perfect for the role.
His role is that of the Human antagonist but I couldn't help actually liking and even agreeing to an extent, some of the things Kaufman does... and it's all from Hopper's enigmatic performance.

Back up comes from Boyd Banks, Tom Savini, Phil Fondacaro, Shawn Roberts (of Resident Evil fame) and Eugene Clarke plays our Head Zombie. Clarke is pretty apt in the role too.

Effects and stuff?
Well, it's is a mix of the olde exploitation stuff we're used to from Dawn and Day, just with the added edge of being pretty realistic.
The practical effects and puppetry, makeup work and so on are brilliant in this one.
The big let down though, is the enhancements to the gore by using CGI.
Now, the CG work on the sets and backgrounds and the greenscreen work is top drawer, it's the CG blood and guts that are a bit iffy. It's not brilliantly rendered tbh and looks like CGI.

---

All in all, a couple little additions, but nothing that'll win awards.
Land is definitely the most soulless of the films, so far, and some of the CG effects aren't great.

It is still a fun adventure for Romero's Dead fans who can spot all the little nods to the other films and will entertain Zombie fans who are just after some popcorn brainless blood 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)
rating_4_5

Captain Spaulding

06-12-14, 07:17 AM

I still haven't seen Day (I rented it through Netflix awhile back and the damn disc was cracked in half), but I've seen all the other movies in the series, including the god-awful Diary of the Dead and Survival of the Dead. Night will always be my favorite, not just because of how influential it is, but because it's the most suspenseful and claustrophobic.

Just curious, Rodent, but would you recommend any of Romero's other films? I've seen bits and pieces of Creepshow, and it didn't look like my kind of thing (Stephen King should stay behind his typewriter, not in front of the camera). But I'm curious about his other films, which I never hear talked about.

The Rodent

06-12-14, 07:22 AM

The Crazies is decent but wasn't well received in critique circles. The remake a couple years ago was good too.

Knightriders is also a good film. Totally different from his usual Horror stuff.

Martin is interesting too. First time Romero and Savini worked together too. Very good film.

The Rodent

06-12-14, 07:26 AM

Oh, and Diary and Survival are on the next two slots in my reviews... coming up over the next 24 hours or so. May as well do all 6 films rather than miss out the last 2.

The Rodent

06-12-14, 08:09 AM

Review #221, Movie #292
Diary Of The Dead

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/3b/DiaryofDeadPoster2.jpg

Year Of Release

2007

Director

George A Romero

Producer

George A Romero, Peter Grunwald, Sam Engelbardt, Artur Spigel, Dan Fireman, John Harrison, Ara Katz

Writer

George A Romero

Cast

Shawn Roberts, Joshua Close, Michelle Morgan, Boyd Banks and George A Romero

Notes

Quentin Tarantino, Wes Craven, Guillermo Del Toro, Stephen King and Simon Pegg all have voice-over parts in this one, usually on TV and radio footage.

Also, Shawn Roberts (from Resident Evil fame) as this film’s lead man makes a return; he was in Land Of The Dead but in a different role and was on screen only briefly.

Boyd Banks also makes a brief reappearance as well, marking his third outing in a Zombie movie.

This is the first time in the Dead Series that time doesn’t progress in terms of the Apocalypse. This film is about the beginning of the Apocalypse, meaning even though some actors returned, that technically in terms of timelines it’s not a spiritual successor to the first four movies.
Romero has stated though, that this film takes place in the same "Universe" as the original trilogy, seeing as this one is based at the very start of the Zombie Apocalypse.

---

Synopsis:
A bunch of film students are in the midst of making their own Horror Movie... when strange things start happening around the world and the dead start coming back to life.
The group, along with their Teacher then end up on a road trip, trying to escape and survive... all the while the student cameraman of the group films as they go.

Review:
Hmm... odd one this.

Even though Romero won the Critics Award for this film, it was slammed by critics and fans alike.

The major problem with the film is that it feels like a cash-in affair, trying to utilise the Found Footage Genre, but it doesn't really do it very well at all.

The biggest fault with the execution of choice of style, is the casting.
Romero has seen fit to go with unknowns again, with exception to Shawn Roberts who is abysmal at best anyway... and Romero pretty much seems to have given a free reign to the young "actors" in terms of how the film plays out. Bad move seeing as none of them seem to have any idea what they're doing.
This film is highly amateur in atmosphere, even more so than Night...

I actually had a thought while watching, which I feel is a bit sacrilegious toward George A Romero... is that the film feels almost like something Uwe Boll would spew out. One film that sprung to mind was House Of The Dead, one of the worst films I've ever seen.
Diary appears to have similar action to it. Meaning, whenever something happens, the cast turn toward the camera while being chomped and the Zombies themselves, whenever they get a gruesome injury, tend to turn and "showcase" their wounds to the camera.
This film is by far the most exploitative in the series. But it does it without any actual style, sadly.

The good points about the film though, is that the filmmakers have gone back to basics and seem to be experimenting again, which is something that was lacking from the clinical Land Of The Dead.
With the movie in general being so different from the others, it makes it feel strangely fresh and new, even with all its faults.
There's also a few scenes of genuine scares and jumps, even though sadly again, the film is lacking in spooky atmosphere.

The general writing is also pretty lacking. There seems to be little actual plot, or even any story exactly going on. It's really more just a made-for-the-sake-of-it movie.

The acting, as I said is pretty dire tbh.
Shawn Roberts, Joshua Close, Michelle Morgan, Joe Dinicol, Scott Wentworth and Phillip Riccio are our main group of screamers... none of which are worthy really to be expanded on in this review.
They're wooden, carry little emotion, have very little charisma and none of them are believable within the endless series of gruesome shenanigans.

Best on show though is RD Reid as a Deaf-And-Dumb Amish man. Sadly, he doesn't last long.

The effects and action as such, as I said, are all exploitations in what can be achieved by having teens screaming at the camera, Zombies doing the same thing... and sadly, the filming style of having the student holding the camera somehow managing to capture every single gory blood soaked injury perfectly amongst the chaos really removes any reality, tension, atmosphere or believability from the scenes.

---

All in all, the weakest of the series by a long, long way.
Badly cast, badly shot, badly executed... the experimental side of the filmmaking is nice to see back again, and it does stand out from the others being all found-footage and so on...

It just should have been much better than this. Especially from Romero.
As for recommending it? I'll 50/50 it, really only one for fans of the Series. Anyone else, it'll be lost on them tbh.

My rating: 24%

http://i1163.photobucket.com/albums/q552/The-Rodent/Rodent%20MoFo%20Stuff/RodentRCircleR5050StampNew_zps36b9d868.png
rating_1_5

The Rodent

06-12-14, 03:10 PM

Review #222, Movie #293
Survival Of The Dead

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e9/Survival_of_the_Dead.jpg

Year Of Release

2009

Director

George A Romero

Producer

Paula Devonshire, Peter Grunwald

Writer

George A Romero

Cast

Alan van Sprang, Kathleen Munroe, Richard Fitzpatrick and Kenneth Welsh

Notes

Another case of using the same actors across different films, this time Alan van Sprang who makes a brief show in Diary Of The Dead reappears in this film… this time round though, Romero breaks his own rule and has a returning character from a previous film rather than just having the actor.

This film also marks the first time in Romero’s Dead Series that two films are directly tied to one another. Romero’s films should be treated as stand-alone films like I said in my reviews of the first four, with no continuity between the stories, hence why returning actors were always in different roles and capacities.

Survival Of The Dead is a direct side story/sequel/prequel to the previous Diary Of The Dead, that is based around and held together with the character played by Alan Van Sprang.

In a similar theme of actors playing differing roles between films, this film does have something of a throwback. This time round we’re treated to Kathleen Munroe playing two different characters in one film. She plays twins, one of whom is normal, the other is Zombified.

---

Synopsis:
A group of National Guard Soldiers abandon their post when they realise that all has been lost.
On their trip, they learn about Plum Island, an apparently safe haven off the coast of Delaware. But making the trip their is the last of their worries when the Soldiers find themselves in the middle of a political row between two religious landowners...

... one believes the Dead should stay dead and the injured should be monitored closely... the other believes that they are like a Godsend and is trying to give them a purpose in the New World other than eating people.

Review:
Much better. this one is a side story to Diary and has, like I said in the Notes that a returning character who was really more of a cameo in Diary, is now the lead.

What's good about this one is it has genuine plot and story to it, contains a number of character arcs and expansions and actually has characters you get to care about.
A big factor in this is which characters you can and can't trust. The lead role was seen in Diary, but was more of a villain, in this one his actions get explained. Then there's the characters of Patrick and Seamus, the two warring landowners... they start off as one type of character respectively, but change gradually over the running time and become really well rounded, and well written characters.

The throwbacks for this one are the usual divided clans, fighting for different things and coming to loggerheads... what's different, is that this one is more of a blood feud with the Soldiers caught in the middle and having to pick a side.

The screenplay plays out like a Soap Opera too. There's a pretty linear plot going on, but the difference is the general writing of the dialogue and atmosphere built up over time being much better placed than the predecessor Diary Of The Dead.

The other good thing is that you don't need to have seen Diary to like or understand this film.

The acting is spot on too.
Alan Van Sprang plays Sgt "Nicotine" Crockett, the tough talking, cigar chomping leader of the Soldiers. He's actually really cool and likeable compared to his introduction in Diary. AVS also makes an intelligent hero too.

Athena Karkanis plays Tomboy... the female of the group. She's a relatively girly but tough chick, who's into girls and is constantly having to reject the advances of fellow Soldier Francisco.

Francisco is played by Stefano Di Matteo. A non-actor as far as I can tell but he's actually a smooth talking Romeo and carries huge charisma.

Sgt Crockett's best pal is Kenny, played by Eric Woolfe. He's more like a comic relief for the group and is pretty tough when he gets going too.

Following the Soldiers is Devon Bostick as "The Kid". Again, more of a comic relief and a kind of plot developer with some of the things he knows about. Bostick is good in the role though and plays it like a kind of Con-Artist.

Kenneth Welsh is one of the standout roles though as Patrick O'Flynn. He's been at war with Seamus Muldoon since they were kids and Welsh manages to play a guy who is not only hard-headed and old-school tough, but also plays it incredibly funny at times too. Brilliant role.

Backup comes from Kathleen Munroe as Janet and Jane, the O'Flynn twins. She's not really seen a great deal though, more like background characters.
Another unused role was Richard Fitzpatrick as Seamus Muldoon... being part of the main rivalry that drives the plot, you don't see a great deal from him and his character is pretty one-directional.

Others are Joris Jarski, Julian Richings, Wayne Robson and Joshua Pearce.

The action is held back in this one as well and is based in reality.
The effects are kept realistic and the CGI has been improved a lot.
The makeup jobs and practical effects, choreography in the gunfights and general aura of the action itself is top drawer, if low in tone.

---

All in all, a massive improvement over Diary Of The Dead...

Still not perfect though, but on a personal level I do actually prefer this one over Land Of The Dead even though in technical terms, Land was a better made movie.
Well written, well acted, nicely played out and the action doesn't disappoint either... and the gory scenes aren't as exploitative as the other films.
Some of the jumps and scary bits are a little lacking though. Kinda generic.

Low tone, enjoyable, comedy-horror-drama.

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)
rating_4

Dog Star Man

06-12-14, 03:21 PM

You have me interested in revisiting "The Dead" films of Romero. I think I stopped at Land of the Dead which, as I recall, I didn't much care for it or Day of the Dead... but I loved Dawn of the Dead and Night of the Living Dead. As soon as I watch them again I hope to come back to this page and read your reviews, I'd love to have a discussion on them with you if you don't mind?

The Rodent

06-12-14, 03:23 PM

Certainly!

Maybe start an actual thread when you've seen them, we can have a good natter.

Yoda

06-12-14, 03:30 PM

Nice! :up: All of 'em tagged. Great series.

The Rodent

06-12-14, 03:33 PM

Nice! :up: All of 'em tagged. Great series.

http://static.fjcdn.com/pictures/Ace_766011_524395.gif

The Rodent

06-25-14, 03:07 AM

Review #223, Movie #294
Identity

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/44/Identity_poster.jpg

Year Of Release
2003

Director
James Mangold

Producer
Cathy Konrad

Writer
Michael Cooney, Agatha Christie

Cast
John Cusack, Ray Liotta, Amanda Peet, John C McGinley, Clea DuVall, Rebecca De Mornay, John Hawkes, Leila Kenzle, William Lee Scott, Brett Loehr, Jake Busey and Alfred Molina with Pruitt Taylor Vince

Notes
Based on Agatha Christie's And Then There Were None (also known by another, more risqué name by modern standards), Identity takes the best of the plot and discards the rest in place of a more modern psychological thriller setting.
Even though Christie's book has been turned to screen many a time already in 1945, 1965, 1974, 1987 and 1989, Identity is a standout adaption of Christie's classic Whodunit?.

Brett Loehr only has half a line of dialogue throughout the whole film.

The movie was filmed across various locations in Los Angeles County, but most of the film was put together on the same sound stage where the Emerald City was filmed for the 1939 film The Wizard Of Oz.

---

Synopsis:
10 strangers end up stranded in torrential rain at a motel in the middle of the Nevada Desert... among the 10 is a Cop and his charge, a dangerous criminal that he is transporting across the country.

When the criminal disappears without a trace, the rest of the group are at odds on what to do...

But nothing is what it seems and the dwindling group are thrown into a night of terror, without any real idea of who or what may be behind their plight or why they're disappearing one by one, or dying in odd circumstances...

Review:
Great stuff.

I've seen the other adaptions of Christie's novel before, but Identity twists the general story to new levels.

It's a pretty unfeasible turn of events at the start, 10 people stranded by rain, but it's one of those things that could only happen in a film like this. What makes the whole thing work though, is the way the film unravels itself and the strange goings-on that throw the viewer into an almost paranormal setting crossed with some thrilling twists and turns and some really good "Outer Limits" style mystery and horror.

Without giving anything away about the plot or ending, the reverse chronology of the first handful of scenes throws the viewer's thinking onto the backfoot, making you never really sure what is actually happening... and then the film delivers its twist perfectly.
Even I was caught out.

It's a very cleverly crafted movie.

The other thing that works is that every character has a history. All different from the novel of course, but their stories are all revealed slowly over the running time and it makes for a movie filled with characters that you can get behind and actually care for or hate, depending on what happens around, or to, them.

The acting is also spot on.
John Cusack plays our main hero. I'd fallen out of favour with Cusack a while back, especially his works after he was in Grosse Point Blank... but this film shows exactly what he's capable of. He's almost the perfect hero.
Ray Liotta is a similar role tbh as the Cop... Liotta is more like the dark side of Cusack and it makes a great dynamic to have these two side by side as the main men of the film.
Amanda Peet as our heroine is also bang on form. I'm not big on Peet's other work, but here she's perfect as the beautiful female of the group.
John Hawkes is also in form as the Motel Owner. I've only seen Hawkes in a couple other things and he's always been good... here though, he's like a spare part who has a pivotal part to play. He's also pretty funny at times and quite cutting and serious at the same time too, especially when the group starts arguing amongst themselves.

John C McGinley is also a turn for the books. I've never seen him in such a different role. Usually he's the slimy type, the dislikeable type, or doing the snarky "Scrubs" role. Here though, McGinley plays an overly cautious, almost geek type, and for his short amount of screen time, I loved his presence in the film.

The rest of the cast aren't seen a huge amount. However when they're shown they all make for believable characters and heighten the tension when needed.
Molina is pretty solid though, as always.

There's little action exactly... the film bases itself around a constant, unfeasible amount of heavy rain and the black-of-night surroundings of the Motel and the desert.
The atmosphere is tip top though and filled with a brilliant air of mystery, especially during a realisation scene with Jake Busey's character.

---

All in all, the best of the Agatha Christie adaptions, especially with the tweak in the storyline...
Good acting, great atmosphere and some pretty well conceived subplots too.
It's also executed brilliantly in terms of sequence.
Lacking in something though, not sure what, but lacking in something that would make it get remembered in 20 years time from now.

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)
rating_5

fuze931

06-25-14, 04:00 AM

Seems like you enjoy what you do good sir. Great reviews :)

The Sci-Fi Slob

06-25-14, 04:09 AM

Nice review. I've always liked Identity.

The Rodent

06-25-14, 04:13 AM

Cheers guys :)

Yeah, I liked Identity... don't care what anyone says.

Deadite

06-25-14, 05:05 AM

It's a quite decent psychological thriller.

the samoan lawyer

06-25-14, 05:05 AM

Good review of Identity, Rodent. I have it in the house but yet to watch it.

The Rodent

06-25-14, 05:08 AM

Should give it a watch bud... don't read up on it first though as it'll spoil it, go in with a fresh mind and go with the flow...

The Rodent

06-28-14, 05:14 AM

Review #224, Movie #295
Stake Land

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/7c/Stake_Land_%28film%29.jpg

Year Of Release
2010

Director
Jim Mickle

Producer
Derek Curl, Larry Fessenden

Writer
Nick Damici, Jim Mickle

Cast
Nick Damici, Connor Paolo, Danielle Harris, Michael Cerveris, Sean Nelson and Kelly McGillis

Notes
Conceived by Nick Damici and Jim Mickle, Stake Land was initially going to be a Web-Series, broken into 40 Episodes at 8 minutes a piece.
When Larry Fessenden got wind of the project though, he pressed Damici and Mickle into making it a full length feature and offered his own services as Producer.
The movie took less than a month to film.

Danielle Harris' casting was also coincidence. The filmmakers were unaware of her connections to other Horror films and status as a scream queen.

---

Synopsis:
In an Apocalyptic world, Martin, a naïve teenaged boy, has just seen his family butchered by Vampires.
Out of the darkness, a Vampire Hunter known only as "Mister" appears and rescues Martin from the same fate.

Taking Martin under his wing, Mister teaches him self-defence, survival... and even how to actually hunt Vampires.

Review:
Underrated, understated and under promoted.

You can tell it’s low budget. But it doesn’t feel low budget, there’s a decent production value behind the film and the general scope of the film works nicely and allows the viewer to believe that this Vampire problem has been an ongoing thing across the entire world.
Basically there’s an untold depth to the story.

The photography and general shooting style of the film is also tip top.

One thing that lets it down is the scenery. Supposedly the characters travel miles across America, but the backdrop never changes.
It gives the impression that the entire movie was actually filmed in a small area and the filmmakers used story and voice-over-narration to try to make out they were more of an open film in terms of location.

I did however like the usage of the Vampires. They aren’t seen a great deal throughout, but what the filmmakers have done is toned back some of the more modern Vampire Lore.

Vamps these days melt with Garlic and explode in a shower of CGI when exposed to sunlight… in Stake Land, they burn up slowly, and Garlic simply burns and slows them down allowing Humans to attack more freely.
It’s a lovely touch to the low budget look of the film and toned back drama of the screenplay to have the Vamps as a backdrop to the story, rather than just being all about the creatures and hard hitting action.

One thing going for the film in terms of story though is that it’s very interpersonal. The whole plot of the film is “we have to head to New Eden”. But the “story” is based around Mister and Martin and their interactions with the people they meet on their road trip.

Meeting Martin at the start, seeing his family killed, Mister rescuing him and then the two becoming not just a Father and Son style relationship, but also that of a Teacher and Student and even a partnership where they watch each other’s backs, even risking their own lives for each other.

It’s a very well pieced together double act and draws the audience in to loving the characters.

Another good thing, the character of Mister is a kind of cliché… but the filmmakers have run with the idea and build mainly on Martin and his development in this new world. Mister is given an arc of sorts, you see him initially as an unemotional hardass but his untold story comes through nicely and you realise there’s more to this guy than just grimacing and looking mean.

As for the acting though…

Nick Damici plays Mister. Absolutely bang on the money. Damici’s acting changes across the running time and makes you want to know Mister. As I said, he comes across as a clichéd hardhead but as the film progresses, Damici really brings you into liking and believing in the character.

Connor Paolo plays Martin. I’m not familiar at all with Paolo’s work, but here he’s very good. Martin starts out as a naïve adolescent and turns into a man and Paolo’s acting is spot on. He also carries the weight of having to narrate the film and his voice work is top notch.

We also have scream-queen Danielle Harris as Belle, a young pregnant girl Martin takes a liking to. Belle eventually joins the duo on the road. Harris is different in this one to her other roles of the past though, she’s not just here for the screaming and running around. Harris has to act, and she’s pretty darned good tbh.

Backup comes from Sean Nelson, Michael Cerveris and Kelly McGillis. Not sure why but McGillis got a top billing on this, she’s not seen a massive amount though, and when she is, she’s barely used.
Michael Cerveris makes a decent showing though as Jebediah Loven. Another slightly clichéd role but definitely worth his place in the film.

As for the action…

Little on show but what there is, is based within reality and certainly well choreographed. The touches added to Vampire Lore also makes for good watching, especially when Mister is explaining the strengths and weaknesses of different types of Vampire.

The makeup work is also decent. The Vampires, dead bodies, burned up Vamp corpses and so on are all well put together. The odd hit of CGI is a little amateur though, but there’s only maybe two scenes of CG.

The film doesn’t however shy away from the odd hint of disturbing action, for instance a baby being eaten, are all part of the shock factor… they are however handled with a kind of decency rather than shock-for-shock’s-sake.
Martin’s character is also expanded on as he becomes handier with a stake, making for the occasional hit of decent one-on-one Vampire fighting.

---

All in all, very well played out across the running time in terms of story and plot and has some very genuine moments of tragedy and disturbing Horror.
The acting is top though, nice effects and nicely written characters.
There's also some realistic traits in the characters.

An entertaining and engaging Horror-Drama.

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)
rating_5