xfearbefore's Movie Reviews

[X]

Jarhead

Plot: Based on former Marine Anthony Swofford's best-selling 2003 book about his pre-Desert Storm experiences in Saudi Arabia and about his experiences fighting in Kuwait.

Director: Sam Mendes
Writers: Anthony Swofford (Book), Timothy Lam (Screenplay)
Starring: Jake Gyllenhaal, Peter Sarsgaard, Jamie Foxx, Chris Cooper, Lucas Black
Year: 2005

A very different kind of war film, if you will. Mainly because for a film that takes place surrounding the events of a war, there is very little fighting to be had, or seen. Those who will dismiss the film for simply not having enough violence for their taste are fools who clearly missed the entire point of the film.

I'm a Gyllenhaal mark, I'll admit it. Ever since I first saw Donnie Darko some eight years ago, I've followed his career steadily, and when I learned that he would be starring in a new film from Sam Mendes, director of American Beauty (one of my favorite movies ever), I knew I had to check it out. I was impressed when I first saw it in theaters, and I remained just as impressed when I sat down to watch this film last night for the first time since the theaters.

The basic plot is the true story of Anthony Swofford's experiences as a Marine sniper leading up to and during the first Gulf War. Unlike other war movies which are all about macho men killing hundreds and hundreds of enemy soldiers, the protagonists in Jarhead kill no one. They've grown up on films like Apocalypse Now and The Deer Hunter, and have been constantly told by their superiors and by veterans that "war is hell".

Instead they find that this war is mostly just waiting around in the desert, cleaning your rifle. Without any sexual or violent release for their pent up energy and anger, some of the soldiers begin to break down, Gyllenhaal in particular melts down and threatens both murder and suicide in a powerful scene that showcases the great talent in Gyllenhaal. They want to fight, to find some kind of way to justify their training, to justify their whole existence. Instead they find neverending boredom.

The performances all around are amazing. Gyllenhaal as I previously mentioned continues to show off his talent and is someone who everyone should keep a careful eye on in the future. Jamie Foxx plays the tough-nosed Staff Sergeant to absolute perfection, and there are great supporting parts from Lucas Black (Friday Night Lights jmt!), Chris Cooper, and even The Office's John Krasinski at one point.

The real highlight of the film though is Peter Sarsgaard. Without a doubt one of the premier and most underrated young actors in all of Hollywood right now, he's made a name for himself as deeply intricate and flawed characters in films such as Boys Don't Cry and Garden State among others. This however may just be his best performance to date. His Corporal Alan Troy is at once the voice of reason, and at next an angry and bitter man with the knowledge he'll soon be kicked out of the Marines for lying on his application. His emotional breakdown at the end of the film, when he and Gyllenhaal are so close to finally getting a kill, and the General comes in and calls in an air strike instead, is just astounding. On one hand you're deeply disturbed by how much he wants to kill another human being, and yet you completely understand it. This is the only place he's ever fit in, and it's going to be taken away from him soon. He knows he'll never get another chance to be seen as a hero to his buddies, and it breaks your heart.

Mendes's direction is flawless, as always. Some of the locations he uses are simply breathtaking, specifically the burning oil fields, which is just flat out amazing to watch.

Along with Three Kings, this is the best film to ever tackle the subject of the first Gulf War, an event that was supposed to define a generation, but instead played out like a video game, with the entire war being won in the air and by men pressing buttons hundreds of miles away from actual combat.

I'd recommend anyone with an interest to further understand both the Gulf War, and the Marines (or "Jarheads") watch this film. It's not your typical "war" movie, but it's certainly a great one.

Rating: 4/5
(Or 8/10 on the Jake Scale)​

 

[jmt225]

I completely agree with X on his review of Jarhead. Great, great film all around. Loved it.

I'm a Gyllenhaal mark, I'll admit it. Ever since I first saw Donnie Darko some eight years ago, I've followed his career steadily,

I actually became a Gyllenhaal mark when I saw his performance in The Good Girl with Jennifer Aniston. That film's a personal favorite of mine. Before then , however, I couldn't stand Gyllenhaal. I hated October Sky, didn't get Donnie Darko, and Bubble Boy to this day is one of the worst comedies I've ever seen. But even after having such a bad opinion of him, he was so marvelous in The Good Girl that I instantly became a fan and when I saw this along with Brokeback Mountain... I too came to find out what you've apparently known since the dude was a teenager... he's one fantastic fucking actor, with a TON of range.

Jamie Foxx plays the tough-nosed Staff Sergeant to absolute perfection,

Like I told you in the Bullshit about Movies thread.. this was without a doubt my favorite performance from Jamie Foxx. He was absolutely tremendous. I had no idea he had it in him.

and there are great supporting parts from Lucas Black (Friday Night Lights jmt!),

Lucas Black is fucking AWESOME. Not just for Friday Night Lights, but this dude was pulling off amazing performances at age 13 when he played Frank in the absolute classic, Sling Blade. I hope he gets more roles in the future.

The real highlight of the film though is Peter Sarsgaard. Without a doubt one of the premier and most underrated young actors in all of Hollywood right now, he's made a name for himself as deeply intricate and flawed characters in films such as Boys Don't Cry and Garden State among others.

I couldn't agree more. That guy is unbelievable, and his performance in this film is flawless. I actually saw a film called Year of the Dog not too long ago he starred in, and he was great in that as well. Dude's going places. Plus, he looks exactly like Kiefer Sutherland, so that can't hurt him, lol.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

Jarhead, it's wank isn't it! A boring film about the boredom of war. You don't watch war films for desert musings. You watch war films for kick ass man action. It's why everybody secretly prefers Platoon to Apocalypse Now.

Into The Wild is good. Is it a book as well? I think I've read it. The ending didn't make my cry, knew that shit was coming. Somethimes I want to do that myself. Just go away and live off the land. But I'm a veggie and my daughter can't reach the counter tops so it might be difficult for both of us.

 

[X]

Pi

Plot: A paranoid mathematician searches for a key number that will unlock the universal patterns found in nature.

Director: Darren Aronofsky
Writer: Darren Aronofsky
Starring: Sean Gullette, Mark Margolis, Ben Shankman
Year: 1998

It took me a while to begin the review for this film mainly because of just how complex it is. You could watch it a few dozen times and still not be entirely sure if you've understood everything going on. This is the debut film from Darren Aronofsky (Requiem For a Dream, The Wrestler) and it's one that no matter how many times I've seen it, I discover something new with each viewing.

The story is simple and yet impossible to comprehend at first. Sean Gullette (who also helped on the story) is Maximillian Cohen, or simply Max, an isolated, reclusive, paranoid and apparently sick mathematical genius. I've only seen Gullette in one other film, Requiem For a Dream (the disgusting shrink that Connelly sleeps with), but he's one talented actor. He nails this character in every way someone could. You want tortured math genius? Forget A Beautiful Mind, go to Pi.

The films plot is hard to delve into. Basically Max is a number theorist, and believes that everything that exists on the planet has an order, and that numbers are the key to unlocking a sort of code for determining that order. Along the way he encounters Lenny, a Hasidic Jew who is also a number theorist, but is trying to unlock a code from the Torah.

The film is shot in black and white, and it was a perfect decision for this film. The cinematography of the film goes perfectly with the bleak and lonely theme of the film. Several of the editing techniques that Aronofsky would utilize to great success in Requiem are featured here. Aronofsky uses Snorricam here, and I'm a big sucker that device. Snorricam is when the camera is rigged onto the actor's body, usually facing them. It gives the effect that everything around the actor is moving, but not the actual actor himself. The way Aronofsky uses it in both this and Requiem are truly inventive film making techniques, which is why I love the man. His direction here is flawless as per usual. Several sequences in the film remind me of Lynch's Eraserhead, about as high of a compliment as you could give someone's debut feature.

This is not a light film. You can't just pop this movie in and not pay attention to it, or you will be completely and utterly lost. This film raises so many questions in the viewer, and really peaks their interest on the numerical theories that are presented in the film. They could start an academic course entirely about the topics of this film, and more than likely they already exist.

This is highly recommended viewing for anyone looking to really invest themselves completely in a film, not emotionally, but intellectually. You won't be sorry you did.

Rating: 4/5
(Or 8/10 on the Jake Scale)​

 

[jmt225]

Pi was my very second Darren Aronofsky experience (right after Requiem of a Dream, which, after seeing, I immediately looked for the filmmaker's other work), and it's a huge reason why Aronofsky is currently one of my favorite directors. Hell, even as great as Aronofsky was, this is still his third best film, and that's saying something (though I wasn't a fan of The Fountain, I must admit).

Anyway, it seems as through 1997-2000 we got some tremendous films about Math in Pi, Good Will Hunting, and A Beautiful Mind. Though all 3 are much more about than just math, but math is the key to each film's heroine to show their genius. And all three were absolutely fantastic.

What I loved about Pi was like X mentioned, it kept your attention and made you think the entire picture. You weren't worried about anything except figuring out what was going on, and how everything worked. And that's how a movie is supposed to be. With Pi, for an hour and a half straight your mind goes on this thought provoking, wonderful adventure that makes you want to not miss out on anything coming ahead. You know that if you slip up for one second, you're lost. And that's awesome to me. I love movies like that. And like X mentioned, this was a perfect movie to be shot in Black and White. It fit perfectly with the theme and setting.

The acting in the film is just superb. Sean Gullette was tremendous as Max, and I can't believe nothing has come of his career acting wise after this film. It shocks me, honestly. Mark Margolis has a role in every Aronofsky picture, with this by far being his largest and best performance in any of them (Note: X, in Gone Baby Gone Mark Margolis plays a drug addict, just so you know when you watch it).

So yeah... overall, great movie. I as well highly recommend this to you guys. If you enjoyed The Wrestler, but haven't seen any other of Darren Aronofsky's work... Pi is a good start, to which should lead you to, in my opinion, one of the greatest films in cinema history, Requiem of a Dream. Everyone needs to know just how great of a director Darren Aronofsky truly is. You will know his name in the future (he's currently working on the Robocop remake, which, with him in charge, should be mind-blowing and one of the greatest remakes of all time), so you might as well start getting to know this man's early work. You won't regret it.

 

[X]

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince

Plot: As Harry Potter begins his 6th year at Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry, he discovers an old book marked mysteriously "This book is the property of the Half-Blood Prince" and begins to learn more about Lord Voldemort's dark past.

Director: David Yates
Writers: J.K. Rowling (Novel), Steve Kloves (Screenplay)
Starring: Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint, Emma Watson, Michael Gambon, Alan Rickman, Jim Broadbent, Tom Felton, Helena Bonham Carter, Bonnie Wright
Year: 2009

Well, I've just gotten back from seeing the latest Harry Potter film, and I must say it was just as I expected: excellent. First off, let me start this review by saying I've been a longtime fan of the series, being one of the millions of people who grew up with the books. As strange as it may sound, Harry Potter has had an incredible impact on both my childhood and my adult life. Nothing has ever engrossed me so much as the Potter universe, not even wrestling or music or film in general. Yeah call me a loser if you'd like, I don't care. The Potter series is the definition of grand storytelling if you ask me.

Now onto the film itself. I'm sure I don't need to actually explain the plot, but I'll go into minor detail. Harry Potter is back at Hogwarts for his 6th year of studies along with his best friends Ron and Hermione. The whole world is in shock over the recent discovery that Voldemort is in fact alive. Do I really need to elaborate further here? Harry versus Voldemort, Good versus Evil, this is the basic plot of every Potter book and film. If I actually need to explain the plot in further detail, odds are you've been living under a rock.

The first thing that really jumps out at the viewer is the breathtaking visuals that Yates has come up with. The first few minutes of the film go right for the jugular and the bride destruction sequence in particular puts earlier summer blockbusters like Transformers 2 and Terminator 4 to absolute shame. The cinematography and the special effects are all absolutely TOP notch here, and you'll find yourself quickly immersed in the rich and colorful universe that is the one of Harry Potter.

The acting is great as well. As has been a theme through out the films, the adults outshine the kids, but that's to be expected. I imagine it must be hard to tell someone like Daniel Radcliffe "Hey yeah go out there and act with Alan Rickman for awhile, off you go!". I can't imagine the pressure these kids must be under (I don't know why I'm calling them kids, they're only a few years younger than myself). Helena Bonham Carter is deliciously evil as always, I cannot imagine anyone else possibly playing the role of Bellatrix. Michael Gambon is his usual stoic and towering self, making you hang onto every word he says through out the film. Rupert Grint as well showed some real comedic talent in this film with some absolutely flawless timing. Alan Rickman though as usual steals every single scene he's in. Can you imagine ANYONE else playing the role of Snape? Nope, didn't think so. The look on Snape's face at the end of the film is priceless.

Be forewarned fans of the book: a LOT is left out in this film. That can only be expected when adapting a nearly 700 page long book, but I was severely disappointed by some of the things that were left out, such as

Spoiler: Part Left out of Film/Don't Read if You Don't Want the Ending Spoiled

Dumbledore's Funeral was mysteriously missing here. I would have figured that would have been the perfect way to end the film. I loved the funeral scene from the book, it really gave you a sense of how beloved of a man Dumbledore was. I can only pray they filmed it but decided to delete it, that way we might be able to see it on a future DVD release.

That said, they still manage to capture alot of what made the book great. One of the big reasons so many fans love the sixth book in particular is because of the romances involved. Fans of the books had been dying to see some REAL romance with the characters (and not the abomination of a character that was Cho Chang; I wish that character had NEVER existed) and the sixth book delivered that. Unfortunately in the film we don't actually see very much of the burgeoning romances between Harry & Ginny and Ron & Hermione, though we do get some hilarious scenes with Lavender and Ron. The romance in the film is sweet, if only briefly touched upon. Hopefully they expand on the romances with the next film.

Really just top notch from beginning to end. This is a much darker Potter, and a much more adult film. Serious problems plague some of these characters, particularly the character of Draco Malfoy which is played to perfection by Tom Felton. Watching Draco's remorse over the awful things he's done, and his subsequent disgust over that remorse itself, it amazing. Felton does a GREAT job with this character, and is one of the real highlights of the film.

Even if you're not a fan of the books, you'll enjoy this film, guaranteed. I'm not quite sure whether or not it's the best film in the series yet, but it's certainly arguable.

Only a few very minor complaints with the film really. First off, the editing. At times it can be pretty bad, though it's not something that most movie-goers will notice. But seeing the camera close up on one character, and than cut to that same character all of a sudden in a new place are poorly done and quite frankly confusing. That said, minor complaint. Also, I would have loved to have seen more of Hagrid in the film. He's only given a few very short and minor scenes, and it feels like his character is wholly ignored through out the film, which is a shame, because he's great fun to watch. The only other complaint I have of the film is that there wasn't enough. I wanted to see alot more from the book in the film, but unfortunately it just wasn't possible.

But hey, when the worst complaint you have on a film is that there wasn't more, that's indicative of just how good of a film it is.

Fans of the book and relative newcomers alike, see this film. Without a doubt the best summer movie released this year, and arguably the best film in the entire Potter franchise.

And damnit Sam if you come in here and shit all over Potter and my love of it, there will be hell to pay son. Serious business. I'll personally destroy every Coen film you own.

Rating: 4/5
(Or 8/10 on the Jake Scale)​

 

[supersayian]

sounds great to me. i loved the Harry Potter books as a kid. i read through a 6 or 700 page book in about three days. this was my favorite books growing up. i have seen all the films up to this date but i really am expecting this one to be great. your review is good. i have always supported this series and will continue to as i go see it this weekend.

 

[X]

Eagle Eye

Plot: Jerry and Rachel are two strangers thrown together by a mysterious phone call from a woman they have never met. Threatening their lives and family, she pushes Jerry and Rachel into a series of increasingly dangerous situations, using the technology of everyday life to track and control their every move.

Director: D.J. Caruso
Writers: John Glenn, Travis Adam Wright, & Dan McDermott
Starring: Shia LaBeouf, Michelle Monaghan, Billy Bob Thornton, Roasio Dawson, Michael Chiklis
Year: 2008

Wow. Where to start with this one. I should have listened to Murf when he told me to avoid this movie at all costs. Unfortunately I fell for the trap. That damn Shia Lab00f got to me again.

I would attempt to explain the plot, but it's so absurd that it doesn't deserve to be fleshed out. Just read the plot description above. The only thing I'll say about it is that somehow we're supposed to believe that some weird orb robot controls Earth and has decided Michael Chiklis would make a good President. If only I were making this up.

The acting...what's there to say? Pretty bad. The only person in the entire film that managed to make me give two shits about them were Billy Bob (I'm a mark for that guy) and Shia. The funeral for Shia's brother was probably the only moment in the entire film in which I said to myself "Oh, look, someone's actually acting and not just running around yelling." Michelle Monaghan has never impressed me, and I'm not sure what the hell Michael Chiklis is even doing in this movie, all maybe 5 minutes of screen time he has. I love the guy, but he chooses some awful movies to take part in.

The biggest problem I had with the cast was Rosario Dawson. What the hell was she doing in this movie? I'm supposed to take her seriously as some high-ranking bad-ass government agent? Ridiculous, she looked exactly like what she was in this movie: a movie star with a costume on. Poor acting.

D.J. Caruso tries to be like Hitchcock, but instead comes off like a 3rd rate Michael Bay. He's quickly made a name for himself as being a poor new-age Hitchcock ripoff artist with his blatant Rear Window rip-off Disturbia, and now he decides "Hey, if the audience ate up the Hitchcock ripoff before, let's do it again in Eagle Eye!". The ending is such a blatant rip-off of The Man Who Knew Too Much that it had me throwing my hands in the air in disbelief. It's one thing to pay homage to Hitchcock and to honor his spirit, but Eagle Eye does neither of these things.

Probably the only thing I enjoyed about the film was the brief Jerry Ferrera cameo in the beginning of the film, and seeing Billy Bob start pointing a shotgun at security guards.

Avoid this film. There's dumb, and than there's Eagle Eye.

Rating: 1.5/5
(Or 3/10 on the Jake Scale)​

 

[X]

Tape

Plot: Three old high school friends pass the time in a Michigan motel room dissecting the painful memories of their high school years.

Director: Richard Linklater
Writer: Stephen Belber
Starring: Ethan Hawke, Robert Sean Leonard, Uma Thurman
Year: 2001

I'm a huge mark for Richard Linklater. Outside of commercial things like School of Rock, the man can do no wrong. I can't tell you how many times I've seen Dazed and Confused, but I'd wager it to be several hundred atleast. Literally used to watch that film on a daily basis. He's made several other great films like Slacker, Waking Life, and A Scanner Darkly, but I had never even heard of Tape until I saw it playing one day on my television. BOY am I glad I decided to watch it.

The plot seems simple at first. Ethan Hawke has come into town for his friend Robert Sean Leonard's first film being shown at a festival. Leonard's character comes to the hotel room to pick up Hawke for dinner, but instead they end up spending the next hour and a half in a hotel room. It seems as though Hawke's character has some ulterior motives for coming back into town, possibly involving a violent crime from both of their pasts.

Linklater's direction here is flawless, per usual. There were several angles that he used in the film that had me marveling at just how skilled of a filmmaker he truly is, simple things like the passing of a joint between two men from the POV of one man's hand give a strange, ethereal feeling to the events taking place. The entire film is real-time, played out as an hour and a half in the lives of these characters, and despite the entire film taking place in one small hotel room, you're never bored.

The acting is as good as it gets here. I've never been a big fan of Ethan Hawke, but his role in this film has won me over for good. He plays the role of Vince with equal parts charm and menace, capturing your attention from the opening seconds and never letting go. Add in an underrated actor like Robert Sean Leonard (Dead Poet's Society, House) and you've got yourself a winning combo right there. It's a testament to their skills as actors that they capture your attention so fully with nothing but dialogue for nearly the entire film. Uma Thurman doesn't even enter the picture until the last 20 minutes or so, though she plays her role superbly as well.

One of the real remarkable things about this film is it's ability to toy with your feelings. Your sympathies will switch from Hawke's character to Leonard's to Thurman's without you even having realized what just happened. Each character is deeply layered, and you'll find yourself siding with certain characters that in retrospect you morally shouldn't.

Overall, while not Linklater's best film, this is certainly one of his most intriguing. I highly recommend you give this film a viewing if you get the chance, especially if you enjoy character studies.

Rating: 4/5
(Or 8/10 on the Jake Scale)​

 

[Y 2 Jake]

Haven't seen Pi since the late 90's, can't remember a thing about it. Not seen Eagle Eye yet or Tape. I think Tape has a different title over here.

Harry Potter & The Half Blood Prince is average at best. It's a wizard-y rom-com and not a very good one. Great visuals and not much else.

 

[X]

Haven't seen Pi since the late 90's, can't remember a thing about it.

It's a worth a rent if you like pretentious movies about numbers and old Jews. It's a actually a good film though, very good.

Not seen Eagle Eye yet or Tape.

Eagle Eye is fun if you like being sodomized with a baseball bat. Tape is good though, even if it is about pretty much nothing.

I think Tape has a different title over here.

I don't think so, but I'm sure it's possible.

Harry Potter & The Half Blood Prince is average at best. It's a wizard-y rom-com and not a very good one. Great visuals and not much else.

What can I say Jake, I have a fetish for magic. They hooked their slimy claws into me at a younger age and haven't let go.

I should have a review up for Towelhead (AKA Nothing is Private) later today.

 

[X]

Towelhead

Plot: A young Arab-American girl struggles with her sexual obsession, a bigoted Army reservist and her strict father during the Gulf War.

Director: Alan Ball
Writers: Alicia Erian (Novel), Alan Ball (Screenplay)
Starring: Summer Bishill, Aaron Eckhart, Toni Collette, Maria Bello, Peter Macdissi, Matt Letscher
Year: 2008

Alan Ball, the mad genius who wrote the universally acclaimed and personal favorite of mine American Beauty, makes his directorial debut here with Towelhead (AKA Nothing is Private) based on the popular novel of the same name.

This film had been firmly atop my "Must-See" list since I first began hearing rumblings of Alan Ball making another film. Rarely is a writer/director as creatively funny and dramatic simultaneously like Ball is. Fans of American Beauty will certainly enjoy some of the same themes being presented in this film, among them adolescent sexuality and repressed prejudices.

The story is pretty simple. Jasira (the gorgeous [and legal mind you] Summer Bishil) is a 13 year old Lebanese-American girl growing up in Texas during the early 90s, specifically during the First Gulf War. After a semi-sexual encounter with her mother's boyfriend, she is shipped off to her strict father's suburban home. Here she's met with both racism from her peers and neighbors as well as the frustrations of being a young girl entering into puberty. The story really delves into that experience, and though I'm a male and thus would have no idea of the authenticity of the experiences shown, it seems to me like it hit the nail spot on the head.

The acting is great from everyone involved. Bishil has put herself on the map with this film and I see Hollywood certainly keeping their eyes on this girl. The man who plays her father, Peter Macdissi, is marvelous as well. The best performance of the film belongs to the seemingly eternally underrated Aaron Eckhart, who plays the slightly racist father next door who finds himself enamored with Jasira perfectly. You know an actor is doing a phenomenal job when the things he's doing are reprehensible, yet he still evokes genuine sympathy out of you. Great smaller roles from Toni Collette and Maria Bello are worth noting as well.

At it's heart the film is a character study; but not simply of Jasira, of the entire young female population of America, and the rapidly changing world they are growing up in. Jasira is constantly exposed to images of beautiful women flaunting their bodies on television and in magazines, and being worshiped for it. She sees things like a nude magazine and thinks "That's what a beautiful woman is". All of the sexual encounters she has and initiates are in part because of this; she thinks that her body is the only route to happiness, and doesn't realize she's being taken advantage of. Obviously this all flies in the face of Muslim culture, and the interactions with her father and his set of morals and rules is great stuff.

The only complaint I have about the film was that the last 20 minutes or so really seemed to lose steam. The film keeps building and building to a point where you think things are going to explode at any minute, but instead of that steam being released in an explosion, it's released slowly over the last 20 minutes and you it really let me down. That said, the film is very good overall, and well worth your time.

A very, very good movie that almost becomes great, but doesn't quite make it. If you're a fan of Alan Ball or the quirky, dark humor of directors like Todd Solondz, you'll certainly enjoy this.

Rating: 3.5/5
(Or 7/10 on the Jake Scale)​

 

[Y 2 Jake]

Towelhead, not seen it. Ort even heard of it. I'll buy it later.

I've been watching lots of films over the past couple of weeks. Me and the children were not a fan of Tokyo Gore Police, but we did like Air Guitar Nation.

Continue with this thread and I might bring back the Seagal reviwes. I found Half Past Dead to be a thoroughly enjoyable romp, I didn't like Seagal's Russian accent in Driven To Kill and I was seriously upset by how poor Against The Dark was.

 

[X]

Just a quick hitter to get this thread back rolling...

[font="Garamond]Them (Ils)[/font]

Plot: Lucas and Clementine live peacefully in their isolated country house, but one night they wake up to strange noise... they're not alone... and a group of hooded assailants begin to terrorize them throughout the night.

Directors: David Moreau, Xavier Palud
Writers: David Moreau, Xavier Palud
Starring: Olivia Bonamy, Michael Cohen
Year: 2006

Just got finished watching this, and I was extremely impressed. It's been sitting here on my shelf for months now, and I finally decided to give it a watch today, considering it's a very short film I figured "Eh? Why not".

Let me just say I was thrilled by this film. For the first time in a very long time my heart was actually beating from the suspense being built on the screen. The way they build suspense in that first half is simply fantastic, a flash of light here, a brief glimpse of a foot. The acting from the couple was extremely good, and though you barely had time to learn about them, you instantly sympathize for them and want them to escape. My goodness was the main actress Olivia Bonamy simply gorgeous, she's like an angel. Which makes it even worse to see her going through all of this shit.

When the films finale hit, I was very impressed. I said to myself "Now THIS is how The Strangers should have been!" Anyone agree with me on that sentiment? I know there are some fans of that film on here, but I personally think it's a steaming pile of shit, and this film further validated that point in my mind; this film takes the exact same premise, and uses it effectively to build unbelievable suspense and to terrify you. The closing scene was particularly chilling.

One of the great things about this film was just the set design and the camerawork. Some of the frenetic editing done during some of the chase scenes was simply brilliant, and really gave the viewer the feeling of being right there along with the couple, running for your life. The set design was marvelous as well; the tunnels and the couple's gothic mansion. It was beautiful and terrifying at the same time.

Overall this was a great chiller. Don't watch this expecting an in-your-face horror film, but rather an extremely suspenseful thriller, that will just happen to horrify you at times. The ending in particular will have you shaking your head, saying to yourself "What the FUCK is wrong with humanity?"

I'd recommend this film to anyone who can get their hands on it. It's everything that The Strangers tried to be, and failed miserably at. THIS is how you make a modern thriller/horror film! Viva le France!

Rating: 4/5
(Or 8/10 on the Jake Scale)​

 

[X]

Inglourious Basterds

Plot: In Nazi-occupied France during World War II, a group of Jewish-American soldiers known as "The Basterds" are chosen specifically to spread fear throughout the Third Reich by scalping and brutally killing Nazis. The Basterds soon cross paths with a French-Jewish teenage girl who runs a movie theater in Paris which is targeted by the soldiers.

Director: Quentin Tarantino
Writer: Quentin Tarantino
Starring: Brad Pitt, Christoph Waltz, Eli Roth, Diane Kruger, Mélanie Laurent, Til Schweiger
Year: 2009


So, I just got back from seeing this. Let me just say, it was a very good film. But don't buy into some of the hype you may be hearing. It's a damn good film, but it's not even the best film released in the last month (District 9 takes that honor).

There are alot of things to really, really like about this film. The use of Ennio Morricone's music is simply superb, and multiplied my enjoyment of the film tenfold (truly one of the very best scores I've ever heard). Christoph Waltz is absolutely stunning as Lt. Hans Landa, and damn well deserves a nomination for Best Supporting Actor come Oscar time, and I won't be surprised when he gets it. Brad Pitt was also excellent and delivered classic line after classic line throughout the film with an excellent Southern drawl that'll have you sitting there with a big fat grin on your face.

The supporting cast is also excellent. Eli Roth was a great casting choice for The Bear Jew, and to be honest by the end of the film I just wanted an entire film based entirely on his character. Granted I'm a mark for Eli Roth, but he was great. It was GREAT to see Til Shweiger getting more work, I've been a big fan of the guy ever since his great role as Mark in SLC Punk 10 years ago, and he's absolutely devilishly great in this film. Having guys like Sam Levine (from Freaks & Geeks!) and BJ Novak in bit parts as well was excellent, and the few lines of dialogue that Novak has are delivered perfectly and had the entire theater laughing it up (the image of Ryan from The Office scalping a Nazi was worth the price of admission alone). There are also quite a few cameos that will be great for fans, including Mike Myers playing Winston Churchill (and doing a damn good job!), as well as Samuel L. Jackson providing narration for a few scenes in the film. One small tidbit I'm not sure many people picked up on but I loved was during one scene in which Brad Pitt is talking to a General over a radio, and the voice of that General is none other than Harvey Keitel! That was completely awesome for Tarantino fans, and I let out a great laugh when I recognized his voice. Very nice little touch.

The violence was also superb. Strange thing to say, I know, but it was very well done, and Tarantino didn't hold back in some of the gore scenes. Greg Nicotero continues to show he's the true heir to Tom Savini when it comes to special effects and make up, as some of the gore had the audience simultaneously squirming and laughing, a very difficult feat

Spoiler: Spoiler

In particular the scene in which the Bear Jew is just emptying his clip into Hitler's head was FANTASTICALLY done, with his head being blown to pieces chip by chip. For a gorehound like myself, I was delighted by that, great work by Nicotero as usual

.

The last 15-20 minutes of the film are really what's going to make or break this movie, and I'm happy to report that it most certainly delivered. The final scene at the theater is absolutely EPIC in every sense of the word, and will rank among Tarantino's best classic scenes in my opinion. The entire theater I was in was just having the time of their fuckin' life watching Nazi after Nazi die, it was a hell of a good time at the movies there.

There are however a few minor problems with the film, the most obvious of which is that there are simply too many subplots and too much wasted time. I love Tarantino's dialogue as much as the next guy (and trust me, the dialogue in this film is up to the Tarantino standard of excellence and will undoubtedly capture your attention), but after 20 minutes in the same bar having the same conversation, you can't help but think "Move the fuck on already!" A few of the subplots in the film really could and probably should have been trimmed down or thrown out all together and it would really have helped the film move along at a more brisk pace. The main selling point of this film is the Basterds and their exploits, and unfortunately there's simply far too much time in the film in which they aren't on screen. Subplots are fine, but when you get a grand total of 20+ minutes of Brad Pitt on screen in a 2 and a half hour film, that kind of sucks. There should have been ALOT more of the Basterds exploits in the film, and I was very disappointed we didn't get to see more of their travels. Big disappointment in that regard.

Overall, I'd certainly recommend this film. It's not as good as District 9, but it's a damn good film that's worth your time. I'd rank it about on par with the Kill Bill series in Tarantino's filmography. Very, very good, but not his best work.

Rating: 4/5
(Or 8/10 on the Jake Scale)​

 

[X]

Halloween II

NOTE: 3/28/10 This is a review of the theatrical cut of Halloween II, not the director's cut or unrated DVD version.

Plot: Laurie Strode struggles to come to terms with her brother Michael's deadly return to Haddonfield, Illinois; meanwhile, Michael prepares for another reunion with his sister.

Director: Rob Zombie
Writer: Rob Zombie
Starring: Scout Taylor Compton, Danielle Harris, Brad Dourif, Malcolm McDowell, Tyler Mane, Brea Grant
Year: 2009

So finally, after all this anticipation this summer (as many of you know I'm a huge Halloween fanatic) for the latest installment of the Halloween franchise, I come out of the theater with mixed feelings, but a sense that I had really seen something that was very, very different from the norm. Quite frankly though, I liked that approach. I'm a huge lover of the old cliched standard slasher film system (The Burning, The Prowler, etc), but if there's one thing that I enjoy about Rob Zombie's reboot of the franchise, it's that he takes a unique approach. A breath of fresh air is always appreciated.

Let me just preface this review by saying that unlike many of my fellow Halloween fans, I actually enjoyed the first film, Rob's remake of the original. I know, I'm crazy, right? It really had to grow on me, but after multiple viewings I've come to enjoy it, and think it's probably the best in the franchise since atleast H20, if not Part 4. I did have some issues with the film, mainly some of the needless childhood scenes (white trash Myers family FTL), but I thought it was overall an enjoyable modern slasher film, albeit one that obviously could never live up the original film.

I'll start off with the good, which there is actually quite a bit of. You can really see how far Zombie has come from his first film to where he is now, while maintaining that in-your-face style that I fell in love with in The Devil's Rejects. This is a movie that was truly meant to be seen in theaters, as Zombie intelligently uses a very sparse score and really lets Scout scream her head off. It may not sound like an honor to some, but to horror fans I think Scout has really proven herself to be an excellent scream queen in the truest sense of the word.

The first 15 minutes of the film are simply fantastic. Every review has said this, and damnit if they weren't right. I really can't describe just how awesome that first fifteen minutes is. Laurie walking around the empty hospital, and Michael Myers arriving to raise hell is damn exciting, and for once in a long time I thought to myself while watching this film "Good lord, Michael Myers is frightening again!" The way Zombie uses The Moody Blues "Nights in White Satin" against the hard rain is simply breathtaking as well, Zombie once again shows that he has a great eye/ear for matching up music with film.

Spoiler

Unfortunately the opening fifteen minutes are then immediately revealed to have been a dream. Which might REALLY piss some people off. Fortunately I'm not one of the people that get pissed when devices like this are used.

One of the things that really sets this film apart is Zombie adapting some surrealist filmmaking tips with a few scenes that one can describe only as "trippy", in a very good way. The vision of Michael's mother and the white horse is absolutely Lynchian, like an outtake from Twin Peaks or something. There are many dream sequences like this, the best of which features some truely grotesque looking "Pumpkin Kings" I guess is the only word to describe them. Laurie screaming in rapid motion inside of a glass box actually sent a chill down my spine, a rarity when I watch horror films anymore (when you've seen as many as me, these films stopped scaring you years ago). These scenes are absolutely wonderful.

The acting as well is actually damned good, specifically that of Brad Dourif. One of my biggest complaints about the first film was the lack of Dourif; when you've got a guy who's that talented, you want to give him as much scenery to chew on as possible. He finally gets his chance here in the sequel, and showcases a great range of emotions, from loving father to rage to depression, he's simply wonderful in this film. Scout Taylor Compton I also thought did a great job here, I've become a big fan of her from her work in these films. She plays a broken down person emotionally, desperate to be happy again and try to forget about the past, only to have it brought back in the worst way possible.

Another big plus to this film is the violence. Whereas the first film was prone to over-editing and quick cuts, the sequel here really focuses on just how brutal Michael is. This brutality is the one thing above all that gives Zombie's re-imagining appeal to me. He's got a great eye for gore, I don't think anyone can argue that. Michael goes all out in this film, absolutely crushing heads, destroying faces, decapitations, slit throats, broken skulls, he's absolutely at his most violent in this film, and I loved it.

Spoiler

It sure did suck seeing Danielle Harris die however. I knew she was going to from the trailers, they couldn't have made that much more obvious, but it was still sad to see every Halloween fans dream girl finally die in this film. This could very well be the last of Danielle Harris we ever see in the Halloween franchise, which makes this reviewer a sad, sad man.

Now onto the bad. First off, and I know this may sound incredibly minor, but the fact that Michael grunts while killing several victims pissed me off. Not only did it sound absolutely ridiculous, it completely pisses on the backstory. Michael hasn't uttered a syllable in 15 years, now he's grunting all over the place?

Some of the scenes with Michael's mother and the vision of a younger Michael are good, but several of them are pointless and pretty bad. If they had just kept it to a minimum, it would have been much more effective when we did see Sherri Moon Zombie again.

Malcolm McDowell as Dr. Loomis here was just written absolutely terribly by Rob. It sucks, but it's true. For the majority of the film Loomis is a gigantic prick and egomaniac, exploiting the Myers murders for personal gain. This is unforgivable to me. This is DOCTOR FUCKING LOOMIS we're talking about here, arguably the most beloved icon in the entire Halloween franchise. He gives Michael a run for his money when it comes to the fans adoration of his character, and I'm one of those fans. Seeing Loomis as a prick for most of the film pissed me off, and his character was used poorly in the film just in part to service the plot device of Laurie finding out she's Michael's sister. That's literally about the only thing he does in the film, besides be a prick, is just so happen to stop in town when Michael takes Laurie, so he can run to her rescue.

A few scenes were also definitely unneeded, and basically served for Michael to go kill a few random townsfolk. One of these scenes is actually quite good, but they really don't serve any purpose. For a fan of slasher films though, it'll be enjoyable.

Spoiler

Also, Loomis was definitely killed at the end of the film. He was hacked to pieces it appeared, which is something else completely idiotic of Rob to have done. Don't flat out KILL Loomis, having him "die" offscreen would have really been better. Loomis dying is rather unnerving.

Spoiler

The ending, I'm not sure if I loved it, or hated it. Laurie ends up killing Michael (for now ) and comes out of the shack she's in with Michael while the police are surrounding them with Michael's mask on. At the end of the film we see Michael's mother again (with the creepy horse) and the vision of young Michael coming to Laurie while she's in the mental hospital presumably, as she smiles, basically telling us that she's going to be the next Myers child to start the killing. This is either a huge nod to Part 4 in which Danielle Harris' character Jamie Lloyd did basically the same thing, or it's just a way of Rob leaving the film open for another sequel. I liked the ending I guess, it just seemed a tad bit rushed. The whole film definitely felt like it only had the short time it did to shoot.

In the end, I really did enjoy this film. It's not a great movie by any measure, but it's a very enjoyable one, with flashes of absolute brilliance, as well as quite a few of it's pitfalls. One thing you can definitely say though is that Zombie really made his movie here, and I give him all the credit in the world for making such a different film.

Rob gets the nod of approval from me on this film. Definitely worth your time if you're a fan of Halloween, horror, or Zombie.

Rating: 3/5
(Or 6.5/10 on the Jake Scale)​

 

[Cowboyfromhell]

I also am a big Halloween fan and I rather enjoyed Zombies Halloween (2007). And I really enjoyed this sequel and I think Xfear gave a very accurate synopsis and review of the film.
I rather enjoyed the fact that Michael grunted like Monica Seles playing in the U.S. Open. At first when I noticed this, I didn't like it but it makes sense. He kills the shit out of people. If it was just a quick slash across the throat, no grunt is needed. But when you are standing above a fallen strip club bouncer and you are repeatedly stomping his head into pudding, a little exertion is needed. So the grunt works, for me. I understand where X is coming from, Michael is expressionless and a silent, emotionless killing machine and the grunt takes away from that factor. But I think since Zombie was trying to show the inner workings of the mind of a serial killer, the mental illness that ravaged his psyche, the Sherri Moon portion of the film (which X is right on, a nice addition but overdone), the fact that Michael is human, a severely disturbed human, this makes the grunt ok. (Holy run on sentence, Kerouac would be proud). Plus it just emphasizes the force that Michael is using. He just doesn’t want to kill you, he wants to destroy you. Lots of pent up anger.
I will also agree that Zombie's Dr Loomis is an egotistical prick and this is the biggest issue I have with Zombie's version. Samuel Loomis did everything he could to help Michael and innocent citizens of Haddonfield in the original series and Zombie's Loomis is the exact opposite. I didn't like this Loomis, not at all.
Zombie once again had an impeccable use of music, no song is ever just background noise and he didn’t overuse the traditional ‘Halloween’ theme. I think he just used it once in fact.
And like X said, the trippy scenes were disturbing, but in a very good and creepy way. The Pumpkin Kings, Scout in a glass coffin, etc… Very cool and original and creepy. There was also a scene where Sheriff Bracket was eating a piece of meat lovers pizza while Laurie and Annie complained about him being a cave man and you shouldn’t eat meat. They would show Brad Douriff eating the pizza and cut to Michael eating a raw animal(to survive), and kept cutting back and forth. Good stuff.

Overall, it is a great horror movie and you should see it because Rob Zombie is an original artist. This is not your typical Hollywood cookie cutter movie and I guarantee you Halloween 3-d, which apparently is being rushed to be released next summer and does not involve Rob, will be mindless, average unimaginative horror movie.

 

[X]

Shocker

Plot: After being sent to the electric chair, a serial killer uses electricity to come back from the dead and carry out his vengeance on the football player who turned him in to the police.

Director: Wes Craven
Writer: Wes Craven
Starring: Paul Berg, Mitch Pileggi, Michael Murphy
Year: 1989

I saw this old review of mine on IMDB while watching this film again today and just thought, holy fuck, I need to post it here. One night only comeback baby. I've never actually felt the need to write a review in all my years surfing IMDb, but I felt there really wasn't any review for this movie that gives it the justice it deserves.

If you're a fan of insanely illogical and hilarious B-movies, this my friend's is for you. Fans of 80s crap-laugh-fests like "Night of the Creeps", "Blood Diner" and "Troll 2" will truly love this movie.

Where to begin with all of the unintentional humor in this film? Let's start with the fact that none of the plot makes any coherent sense, whatsoever. Let's just run down some of the things that will leave you scratching your head in confusion and laughter.

1. Why is Peter Berg a Psychic? Did that serve any purpose in the actual plot itself? 2. How exactly does this serial killer manage to massacre over THIRTY families in what appears to be a very small town. Seriously, how the hell do you get away with murdering 30 families in the same town? And why would anyone ever stay in that town? 3. The police in this movie are probably the dumbest I've ever seen in a movie. Upon finding the killer in a house in the beginning of the film, all 8 or so cops storm up the stairs chasing the man as he escapes from the roof. Seriously, no one thought to maybe keep one guy outside the building, ya know, IN CASE HE TRIES TO ESCAPE? Also, why aren't the police following Peter Berg's character this entire movie? Literally everyone he comes into contact with gets murdered by the killer, and these cops don't have time to even check up on the kid once after his entire family and girlfriend have been slaughtered? Worst (or best) of all is the scene in with Peter Berg's character is chasing the killer's soul which is jumping from body to body through a park. Despite the fact that bullet after bullet after bullet is shot, and several dead bodies lay in the middle of a public park, the police are nowhere to be found. (This scene is especially hilarious when Berg begins violently shaking an 8 year old girl who's body the soul has jumped into) 4. How the hell does Mitch Pileggi's character attain his "shocking" powers? The only attempt at an explanation given is just a vague comment that he liked to practice black magic. We're given maybe 20 seconds explanation of this, and then it's never mentioned again.

You get where I'm going with this? Me and my buddy were in stitches this entire movie, whether it be the stereotypically laughable 80s "metal" soundtrack, or the small things like why and how the entire football team has matching black trench coats with their schools initials on them (what school issues black trench coats? The comedy here practically writes itself).

If you're a lover of bad movies, as in "so bad you cry with laughter", then check this out, IMMEDIATELY. Almost on par with Troll 2 as the worst and funniest movie ever. There's just absolutely no way that Wes Craven could have been serious when he made this film, I'm convinced it was one giant joke from the get-go. Highly rated and recommended for being fucking batshit crazy hilarious.

Rating: 3/5 (For Being Fucking Insane)​

 

[Pepe Silvia]

I highly, HIGHLY suggest for your next movie (Or soon), you review Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. That is an absolute joy of a movie, especially trying to piece together some of the scenes chronologically. Sort of like watching Deja Vu. (Denzel) It's also kind of nice to see Jim Carrey acting a character other than his usual over-the-top goofy self. He's a very talented man.

 

[X]

I highly, HIGHLY suggest for your next movie (Or soon), you review Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind. That is an absolute joy of a movie, especially trying to piece together some of the scenes chronologically. Sort of like watching Deja Vu. (Denzel) It's also kind of nice to see Jim Carrey acting a character other than his usual over-the-top goofy self. He's a very talented man.

I could do that pretty well, it's one of my favorite films. Charlie Kaufman is probably my favorite screenwriter working today, if not ever, the stories the man creates are so original and surreal and emotional, the guy is just a fucking genius. Jim Carrey was so damn good in that film, as was Winslet, but that's nothing new.

Yeah I kind of haven't reviewed any films in months and months, but just felt the need to add my old Shocker review. Funniest god damn movie ever.

 

[Y 2 Jake]

Rating: 3/5
(Or 6.5/10 on the Jake Scale)

Bad at mathematics and with a complete misunderstanding of the Jake scale. I also rated it a 7/10, I believe.

Funny story about Shocker, I used to go to my local video rental place, CoOp they used to call it, and lovingly look at all the cool video artwork they used to have. One time I asked my Nan if I could rent Shocker, it didn't seem unreasonable, I may have been 7 but we'd shared a coco over the three breasted lady in Total Recall, so I didn't see a problem. Unfortunately she declined, she said I wasn't old enough, even though I pointed out I wasn't old enough to see Evil Dead but I'd seen it regardless. From what I remember I took home the Tom & Jerry movie instead.

Anyway, many years later, much to my surprise my Nan bough me a video, yeah it was Romper Stomper, but she thought she'd bought me Shocker and for that I was truly impressed. I was 11.

I've never seen Shocker and my Nan is now dead, you just can't catch the breaks these days.

 

[Pepe Silvia]

I could do that pretty well, it's one of my favorite films. Charlie Kaufman is probably my favorite screenwriter working today, if not ever, the stories the man creates are so original and surreal and emotional, the guy is just a fucking genius. Jim Carrey was so damn good in that film, as was Winslet, but that's nothing new.

Yeah I kind of haven't reviewed any films in months and months, but just felt the need to add my old Shocker review. Funniest god damn movie ever.

Not sure if it's of the same degree of awful funny, but I'm thinking you might have the same view towards Be Kind, Rewind. I don't know anyone who didn't chuckle at how horrid them remaking Ghostbusters was. For some reason, the movie was horrible, yet I enjoyed it thoroughly.