20140205: Drama Review--The Man Who Cried

The Man Who Cried

1. Fundamentals, reception.
1. British/French live action feature length film, 2000, rated R, 99 minutes.
2. IMDB: 6.2/10.0 from 10,979 audience ratings.  Spoken word is in English and multiple languages.
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 35% on the meter; 59% liked it from 25,557 audience ratings.
4. Netflix: 3.3/5.0 from 341,783 audience ratings.
5. Written and directed by: Sally Potter.
6. Starring: Johnny Depp as Cesar, Christina Ricci as Suzi, Cate Blanchette as Lola, Oleg Yankovskiy as Father, John Turturro as Dante Dominio, Harry Dean Stanton as Felix Perlman.


2. Setup and Plot
1. Fegele (later Suzi) grows up in Russia in a small Jewish settlement.  Her father leaves the family to seek his fortune in America.  After he has left, the settlement is burnt to the ground, and many die.  After reports of this, the father does not look for his daughter.


2. Suzi gets evacuated to England, and learns other languages there.  When she is a bit older, she expresses an interest in singing and show business, and gets a berth in Paris.  There she meets Lola, another expat Russian; Cesar, a gypsy; Dante, an Italian opera singer; Felix, who runs the musicals that Dante stars in.


3. Paris is OK for Suzi for a while, but eventually the Nazis get closer, and closer, then take Paris.  After a period of occupation, it becomes clear that she should leave. She would like to stay with Cesar, but he advises her to go.  Lola gets tickets for Lola and Suzi, and they get on a ship headed for America.


4. Do they make the crossing safely?  Does Suzi find her father in America?


3. Conclusions
1. One line summary: Russian Jewish singer makes her way to America during the Nazi period in Europe.
2. Three stars of five.


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 9/10 Fine looking picture for the most part.


2. Sound: 8/10 OK.


3. Acting: 5/10 Kudos to Johnny Depp, Christina Ricci, Harry Dean Stanton, and Cate Blanchette for individual performances.  The chemistry between characters seemed a bit lacking, though.  John Turturro was a major detriment, especially the dreadfully fake lip-synching.  His portrayal of a racist bully was fairly good, but did not make up for the rotten performance as a singer.


4. Screenplay: 5/10 This was a nice 15 minute story stretched over 99 minutes.

20140205: Drama Review--Kahaani

Kahaani

1. Fundamentals, reception.
1. Indian live action feature length film, 2012, NR, 122 minutes, thriller, drama.
2. IMDB: 8.3/10.0 from 21,645 audience ratings. Spoken languages are Hindi and Bengali; subtitles in English.
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 'No score yet,' 89% liked it from 1,138 audience ratings.
4. Netflix: 4.1/5.0 from 88,311 audience ratings.
5. Written and directed by: Sujoy Ghosh.
6. Starring: Vidya Balan as Vidya Venkatesan, Parambrata Chatterjee as Inspector Satyaki Sinha aka Rana, Indraneil Sengupta as Arnab Bagchi/Milan Damji, Colleen Blanch as Agnes D'Mello, Nawazuddin Siddiqui as Mr. Khan, Saswata Chatterjee as Bob Biswas.


2. Setup and Plot
1. The film opens with some experiments on rats.  Looks like nerve gas.  Soon thereafter, there is a mass death on a train when a vial of the stuff is broken in one of the cars.  End segment.


2. Vidya travels from London, UK to Kolkata, West Bengal, IN to find her husband.  He talked to her everyday since he left London, up until about two weeks previous.


3. At the first the police have no idea.  The place where he worked claimed he worked says they made no assignments for him, and he did not report to them.  The police suggest a body; she does not recognise it.  She and the police go to where his uncle lived, but no one will say that they know of him.  They get the same sort of response at the school where he did his studies in youth.  The cops investigate the airline records; no one of his name left London nor arrived in Kolkata on the given dates.


4. Vidya reached out to Agnes, who does some digging, but finds locked files.  Oi.  She remembers a man with another name (Milan Damji) who looked just like Vidya's picture of her husband.  Soon thereafter, Agnes is murdered.  A police official (Khan) who is targeting the company NDC interviews her about her relationship to Agnes.  The experiments at the beginning of the film were done at NDC.


5. Khan and his boss reach out to outlier intelligence personnel to solve the crime of the rail attack.  The bad guys attempt to scare Vidya with a visit from the man who assassinated Agnes.  Vidya and Rana continue to investigate her husband's real movements before he disappeared.


6. Will Vidya find out the truth?  Is her husband still alive?  Will the miscreants be brought to justice?


3. Conclusions
1. One line summary: Brave pregnant woman searches for her missing husband amidst corruption.
2. Three stars of five.


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 6/10 Lots of VHS level shooting, lots of amateurish footage.


2. Sound: 8/10 Mostly fine, but some of the incidental music is annoying to say the least.


3. Acting: 7/10 Reasonable.  The is mostly a one-woman show, but the one woman is not nearly stellar enough to carry a two hour movie.  The long-suffering Parambrata Chatterjee gave a good performance, which almost counterbalanced the rotten work of Nawazuddin Siddiqui.  Saswata Chatterjee as the assassin was not very believable either.


4. Screenplay: 0/10 Absurd.  The bad guys could have defused this at many junctures with relative ease.  A single knife thrust, for instance, and no one would be left who cared enough to keep the investigation going.  So, this is PC nonsense with an unconvincing lead.  The last five minutes were the worst in that regard.

20140204: Drama Review--Boogie Woogie

Boogie Woogie

1. Fundamentals, reception.
1. British live action feature length film, 2009, NR, 94 minutes, comedy, drama.
2. IMDB: 5.3/10.0 from 2,425 audience ratings. Estimated budget, 6 million USD.
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 36% on the meter; 20% liked it from 1,030 audience ratings.
4. Netflix: 2.7/5.0 from 59,107 audience ratings.
5. Directed by: Duncan Ward.  Written by Danny Moynihan.
6. Starring: Stellan Skarsgard as Bob Maclestone, Gillian Anderson as Jean Maclestone, Alan Cumming as Dewey Dalamanatousis, Heather Graham as Beth Freemantle, Danny Huston as Art Spindle, Jack Huston as Jo Richards, Christopher Lee as Mr. Alfred Rhinegold, Joanna Lumley as Mrs. Alfreda Rhinegold, Amanda Seifried as Paige Oppenheimer, Gemma Atkinson as Charlotte Bailey, Jamie Winstone as Elaine, Simon McBruney as Robert Freign, Charlotte Rampling as Emille.


2. Setup and Plot
1. There are several threads running through this film, rather like the more complicated Robert Altman films.


2. Art Spindle is the dealer who attempts to swindle every one he knows.  He also likes to run his hands over younger people (man or woman) in the art world.


3. Jean and Bob Maclestone are in their prime, in some senses, but their marriage is falling apart.  Bob is having an affair with Beth (Art's assistant), while Jean is dallying with the artist Jo Richards. Plus they disagree on just about every art decision.  Jean drops her high heel while hiding with Jo in a men's rest room stall.  Bob notices its exact shape and size, then kicks it back to her.  Later she asks for a divorce, and is shocked when he agrees immediately.


4. The older couple, Alfred and Alfreda Rhinegold, own the art work 'Boogie Woogie' which so many people want in the film.  Alfred has had it for 50 years; Alfreda recognises that they are broke and need the money.


5. Art fires Beth for moving toward starting her own business.  Then Art gives Beth a party that Jean thinks is 'so moving.'


6. Jean leaves Bob and goes to Art's place, inadvertently interrupting a liaison.  Speaking of breakups, Elaine decides to break her business relationship with Dewey.  As her erstwhile agent, Dewey gave her a place to live and supported her art career.  Beth offers Elaine a better deal, so Elaine decides to go with Beth who wants an exclusive (business) relationship.  Paige visits Jo's studio, which we see doubles as his seduction pad, particularly his 'peripheral vision' project.  Paige objects, "Aren't you with Beth?"


7. Art Spindler deals with Freign, who has Alfreda's ear, in an attempt to finesse Alfred's desire to keep the piece by Mondrian.  Bob and his lawyer deal with splitting resources, while Jean and her lawyer Emille do roughly the same.  That goes on for a bit too long, but seems reasonable given how much property the couple has.  Well, had...the lawyers will soak up some of it.  Emille gives Jean good advice, which is about the best relationship in the film.  Bob attempts an end run around the process with the lawyers.


8. Will the Mondrian get sold?  Will the divorce get settled in a half way reasonable fashion?  Who will get clobbered in this demolition derby?


3. Conclusions
1. One line summary: Follows the wheeling and dealing in the upper echelons of the art world.
2. Four stars of five


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 7/10 Often outstanding, but also sometimes wretched, mostly during the hand-held phases.


2. Sound: 10/10 Just fine.


3. Acting: 7/10 Stellen Skarsgard, Gillian Anderson, Christopher Lee, Danny Huston, Charlotte Rampling, and Joanna Lumley were marvelous.  Unfortunately, Jamie Winstone, Simon McBruney, Gemma Atkinson, Amanda Seifried, and Jack Huston were in the cast.  I usually enjoy Alan Cumming's work, but not this time, not by a long shot.


4. Screenplay: 6/10 The story was slow getting off the ground, and continued that way for too long.  It picks up some speed after context is well set.  I liked the ending, since it showed some story threads leading to crashes and others going on to more success.

20140203: Movie Review--The Naked Kitchen

The Naked Kitchen (Kichin)

1. Fundamentals, reception.
1. Korean live action feature length film, 2009, NR, 102 minutes, drama, romance.
2. IMDB: 6.5/10.0 from 202 audience ratings.  Spoken word is in Korean; subtitles in English; aspect 2.35
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 'No reviews yet,' 17% wanted to see it from 116 audience ratings.
4. Netflix: 3.2/5.0 from 19,524 audience ratings.
5. Written and directed by: Ji-yeong Hong.
6. Starring: Min-a Shin as Ahn Mo-rae, Ji-hun Ju as Park Du-re, Tae-woo Kim as Han Sang-in, Yi-da Jeon as Seon-woo Kim.


2. Setup and Plot
1. Mo-rae is married to Sang-in, and has known him since childhood.  She even calls him Bro to commemorate this.  Sang-in switches business to being a restauranteur, and gets a new mentor, Du-re.  Unfortunately, Mo-rae has a chance meeting with Du-re before he is introduced by her husband; they start an affair.  When she meets Du-re formally, it is a bit of a shock.


2. Mo-rae tells Sang-in she's been unfaithful.  Fairly soon after that, Sang-in forgives her for it.  The affair continues, however, and Sang-in stays in the dark about the identity of the other man.  Of course, he starts to figure it out, since Mo-rae and Du-re are fairly obvious about it.


3. Will Mo-rae stay with Sang-in or go off with Du-re?  Are there further complications?


3. Conclusions
1. We see the difficulties of rich, young professionals in perfect health.  They do manage to create problems for themselves through ongoing irresponsibility.
2. I've seen this (RT) described as a comedy.  There is absolutely nothing funny about this movie.
3. One line summary: Love triangle gone bad, or was it gone stupid?
4. Three stars of five.


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 10/10 Well done.


2. Sound: 8/10 The subtitles seemed OK compared to people's expressions, tones, and actions while speaking.


3. Acting: 6/10 Reasonable.


4. Screenplay: 5/10 A good 15 minutes of story spread over 102 minutes.  Incredibly stupid ending.

20140202: SciFi Review--Alien Dawn

Alien Dawn

1. Production Fundamentals; Reception
1. American live action feature length film, 2012, rated R, 80 minutes, SciFi.
2. IMDB: 2.4/10.0 from 579 audience ratings.  Estimated budget, 1.85 million USD.
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 'No reviews yet,' 0% liked it from 19 audience ratings.
4. Netflix: 2.5/5.0 from 56,456 audience ratings.
5. Written and directed by Neil Johnson.
6. Starring:  Rachelle Dimaria as Marissa J. McKellen, Alex Bell as Anders Kaczynski, Michael Abruscato as Roger Kaczynski, Cynthia Martin as Joni Mitchell, Tiffany Adams as Sera Michaels, Tiffany Martin as Tiffany Lewis, Marc Zicree as Brad Raybury.


2. Setup, Plot
1. Aliens invade the SW USA.  They make sounds like 1950s aliens, most specifically, the sounds in War of the Worlds, 1953.


2. Characters named Brad Raybury and Joni Mitchell?  Good grief.


3. Soon enough, the story centers on survivors are Marissa, Anders, and Roger, with no resources to speak of, and no plans.  They have long arguments about what food is common, and what is not.  These folks are pointless.  They care more about bickering than about surviving.  Later they join up with Sera and Tiffany.


4. This is a tough one.  Should I root for the powerful, effective aliens or the feckless, lame moronic humans?


3. Conclusions
1. One line summary: Full of sound and fury, signifying less than nothing.
2. One star of five.


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 2/10 Some of it is bad; much of the rest is really bad.  The found footage parts were as atrocious as expected.


2. Sound: 2/10 Terrible.  Leveling was done by someone who hates audiences. 


3. Acting: 0/10 Terrible.  All the performances. All the characters are unlikeable.  There are too many absurd arguments about ridiculous non-issues.  If one is going to have a mostly eastern European cast, why not film in eastern Europe to save money?


4. Screenplay: 0/10 Very stupid dialog.  Rips off War of the Worlds and Skyline rather openly. The depictions of ultimate stupidity (Woman asks for water. Man forces a cup of bleach down her throat.  Man gets excited; does not know why the woman is suddenly in acute distress.) were fairly convincing.  How are such lame, incompetent people to make any progress against the aliens?  Cell phones work during this invasion?  Not for long. The military hands out heavy weapons to civilians?  Nope.


5. SFX: 0/10 Incredibly bad. One of the worst jobs I have ever seen, beginning to end.

20140202: Horror Review--Jack the Reaper

Jack the Reaper

1. Production Fundamentals; Reception
1. American live action feature length film, 2011, rated R, 86 minutes, horror.
2. IMDB: 3.5/10.0 from 486 audience ratings.
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 'No reviews yet,' 22% liked it from 55 audience ratings.
4. Netflix: 3.0/5.0 from 30,892 audience ratings.
5. Written and directed by Kimberley Seilhamer.
6. Starring:  Douglas Tait as Railroad Jack, Sally Kirkland as Harold's Nana, Tony Todd as Mr. Steele, Alexandra Holder as Jesse, Jay Gillespie as Shawn Hickey, Chris Bruno as Paramedic Vasquez, Isobel Cueva as Paramedic Duyenen, Shanti Rule as Heather, Richard Chery as Andre, David Lee Walton as Jesse's Dad, Andrew Olsen as Brian (aka Casper).


2. Setup, Plot
1. 'Charon High School:' now there is a great start, Charon being the oarsman on the boat that crosses the rivers Styx and Acheron separating the living world from the underworld.  The film is a murder elimination derby, so nice telegraphing.


2. Twenty-something actors playing teen characters in high school gather for a field trip.  Heather is pregnant by a not ready for fatherhood boy.  Jesse's being treated badly by her father.  Various bullying pairs are present.  One of the girls is deaf.


3. All the idiots on the bus have not completed a paper about the Industrial Revolution for one of their classes.  The teacher makes everything clear: do the field trip without nonsense, then pass the class.  Otherwise, fail.


4. Mr. Steele gives the first lecture at a location filled with memorabilia from the 19th century part of the Industrial Revolution.  He emphasizes the dangers of the iron horse.


5. One of the kids sees a figure by the road on the way there.  Mr. Steele later identifies him as Railroad Jack, who is a reaper of sorts.  If one has seen him, then he has eyes on you, and so on.


6. On the way back, the trouble starts.  The bus crashes.  The f word is issued liberally.  The cell phone coverage fails.  The teacher is gone.  The bus driver is gone.


7. Then the kids see the 'carnival.'  Sure.  The kid who warns about the man she kept seeing on the way is laughed down.  They find no one, they find no telephone that works. Are these clues?  They get a number of the attractions to operate, and have fun for a while, but then the fun ends.


8. Will any of these deserving teens survive?


3. Conclusions
1. One line summary: Teen murder elimination derby; better than some, worse than most.
2. Two stars of five.


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 4/10 Camera shake, washed out appearance.  Seems to be only VHS quality in sunlight as well.


2. Sound: 7/10 I could make out the spoken words. The incidental music was not the best.


3. Acting: 4/10 All the actors portraying teens gave poor performances.  Why not hire absolute amateurs of the correct age and get better performances?  Tony Todd was great as usual; that's what the +4 is for.


4. Screenplay: 4/10 Teen murder elimination derby; better than some, worse than most.


5. SFX: 0/10 Horrible.

20140201: Horror Review--The Bell Witch Haunting

The Bell Witch Haunting

1. Fundamentals, reception.
1. American live action feature length film, 2013, NR, 90 minutes, horror
2. IMDB: 3.4/10.0 from 492 audience ratings.
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 'No reivews yet,' 6% liked it from 106 audience ratings.
4. Netflix: 2.8/5.0 from 84,954 audience ratings.
5. Directed by: Glenn Miller.
6. Starring: Cat Alter as Dana, Drew Cash as Scott, Brandan Hellenthal as Brandon Sawyer, Julia Cearley as Janette Sawyer, Natalie Burtney as Lisa.


2. Setup and Plot
1. The Robertson County Sheriff's Department (in TN, I think, rather than TX or KY) has a short segment where they say they found some footage from the cell phones and video cameras on or near the Sawyer families corpses. So, we are locked into 'found footage.'  Later on in the film the cops called to find Dana Sawyer refers to himself as from Adams County PD.


2. Brandon gets a video camera as a birthday gift.  He starts annoying everyone immediately.  He records some poltergeist activity in empty rooms, but never seems to notice this.  He records a whole lot of other things that get ignored.


3. The daughter has terrifying dreams.  The lights flicker; the electrician they call gets electrocuted on an outside junction box.  The son and his friend find some history of the county which includes the Bell Witch.  As it turns out, the house and grounds intersect with the land owned by the Bell Witch.


4. As time wears on, the family dies except for one.


3. Conclusions
1. One line summary: Found footage death elimination derby; camera quality better than some other found footage disasters.
2. Two stars of five.  Favourite part: Dana kills her brother with his birthday present.


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 4/10 The usual mix: anything from shaky cam plus bad everything all the way to full-lit, beautifully framed and focused.  The long intervals of static shots of empty rooms were not a plus.


2. Sound: 4/10 Varies, just like the visuals.  Some of it is really poor, where words are hard to figure out.


3. Acting: 2/10 More or less at reality-TV level.  The exorcism scene just sucked rocks in terms of acting.


4. Screenplay: 2/10 Nothing new.  Perhaps 10 minutes of content stretched over 90 minutes of bad visuals and iffy sound.

20140201: SciFi Review--Plus One

Plus One

1. Fundamentals, reception.
1. American live action feature length film, 2013, NR, 96 minutes, scifi, thriller, horror.
2. IMDB: 5.5/10.0 from 2,252 audience ratings.
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 67% on the meter; 40% liked it from 342 audience ratings.
4. Netflix: 3.1/5.0 from 30,363 audience ratings.
5. Directed by: Dennis Iliadis.
6. Starring: Rhys Wakefield as David, Logan Miller as Teddy, Ashley Hinshaw as Jill, Natalie Hall as Melanie, Rohan Kymal as Angad.


2. Setup and Plot
1. Setting: upper end high school, privileged teenagers, little supervision, too many resources available, huge expensive party for these wastrels.


2. A meteor comes from space and lands somewhere nearby.  It gets into the electrical system.


3. After some analysis, it starts duplicating people.  At first no one notices.  Then there are some odd situations where a person sees another person and their duplicate.  For a horrid interval, there were a dozen or so simultaneous fights to the death.  There are injuries and fatalities.


4. Then there is re-integration when both copies still exist.  A few feel great to be alive; many are still reeling from the horror with blood on their hands.


3. Conclusions
1. One line summary: Teen sex comedy crossed with teen elimination murder derby.
2. Three stars of five.


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 8/10 Mostly OK, except for some of the low light scenes.


2. Sound: 4/10 Unbelievably poor.


3. Acting: 5/10 Not very convincing, except from the actors who looked like they were 25 to 30 years old. 


4. Screenplay: 7/10 Fairly good what-if movie.

20140201: Movie Review--Upstream Color

Upstream Color

1. Fundamentals, reception.
1. American live action feature length film, 2013, NR, 96 minutes, drama, indie, SciFi, aspect 2.35; spoken word is in English.
2. IMDB: 6.9/10.0 from 10, 456 audience ratings.
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 85% on the meter; 71% liked it from 9,717 audience ratings.
4. Netflix: 3.5/5.0 from 109,355 audience ratings.
5. Written and directed by: Shane Carruth.
6. Starring: Amy Seimetz as Kris, Shane Carruth as Jeff,  Andrew Sensenig as The Sampler.


2. Setup and Plot
1. Kris is attacked one night with an electric stun device, then force-fed a worm of some sort.   She gives her money to the scum who attacked her.  She takes equity out of real property in which she has some ownership.  Most things of value that she has she cashes in or surrenders to her abductor and parasite.  Another man abducts her and transfers some of the worms to pigs that are tagged.  Apparently there are other victims of this aggressive identity theft.


2. After the worms are removed, she slowly regains self awareness.  She loses her job when she reports to work again.  She challenges the bank operations she has done, but the bank has photographic evidence that she in fact instigated her own financial meltdown.


3. She meets Jeff, who seems to have gone through a similar process of life rape.  These two broken people spend time together.  Both of them have memory problems.  He can hold down a job doing financial work off the record...until he decides to beat up his co-workers.  She's had some sort of problem where she cannot have children.  About the time he decided to lose his job, she has some sort of work related foul up.  They end up cuddling in the empty bathtub with their clothes on.


4. At one point, the keeper of the pigs gathers up a litter from an infected mother.  He ties the piglets up in a burlap bag on throws them into a stream.  Everything rots.  The worms travel to some orchids.  The orchids are collected, packaged,  and sold, complete with the parasites.  Great.


5. The book Walden is shown, read from, discussed, and referred to during the film.


6. They eventually obtain some of the pig farmer's records. These include information about them, but they turn it into a mailing list.  They mail a copy of Walden, and invite other victims to the pig farm.


3. Conclusions
1. Some of the words and phrases I see applied to this film are cerebral, artistic, intellectual, 'artistic side of the brain,' beautiful, compelling and so on.  I would counter with pretentious, ugly, pointless, unfocused, deficient, ill-planned, bovine scatology.
2. One line summary: It takes considerable skill to make a film this bad.
3. One star of five.  Four black holes for cinematography, sound, acting, and screenplay.


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 0/10 Some stretches of this film show expertise.  Based on that, one must figure that the poor quality of the film was a choice.  Poor framing, poor focus, poor depth of field, jerky camera, massive, avoidable flair not avoided, and so on.  The number of abrupt meaningless transitions is rather high, in the hundreds at least.


2. Sound: 0/10 The incidental music is irritating at best, mind numbingly bad at worst.  The voice miking is rather variable.  I had my hand on the volume control just so I could attempt to hear the dialog or not be drowned out by the atrocious music.  In several passages, the visuals have the characters silent while the sound from another scene is being played.  This choice not to synchronise is repellent.


3. Acting: 0/10 Speaking without affect: no smiles, no frowns, no sparkling eyes, no concern.  Fire the casting director as well as the director.  Most of all, lose the two lead actors.  High school actors with calm faces could have done as well.


4. Screenplay: 0/10 Death by a thousand (editing) cuts.  Remember the fable of 'The Emperor Has No Clothes.'  This movie sucks rocks.

20140131: Animation Review--Kaena: The Prophecy

Kaena: the Prophecy

1. Fundamentals, reception.
1. French live action feature length film, 2003, PG13, 85 minutes, animation, adventure, fantasy.
2. IMDB: 6.2/10.0 from 3,082 audience ratings. 
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 7% on the meter; 44% liked it from 5,626 audience ratings.
4. I saw this on Crackle.
5. Directed by: Chris Delaporte, Pascal Pinon.
6. Starring: Kirsten Dunst as Kaena, Richard Harris as Opaz, Anjelica Huston Queen of the Selenites, Michael McShane as Assad, Keith David as Voxem.


2. Setup and Plot
1. The picture starts near a village high on a huge vine called Axis.  One resident is Kaena, a young adult woman who likes to adventure, while the rest of the village is bound to harvesting sap and offering it to the gods.


2. For sassing the priest, she is exiled.  She is captured by an unfamiliar group that is very interested in her because she has curiosity, and will venture beyond the village.


3. Opaz and his people have reconstructed a star ship to return to their home planet.  Kaena sees visions of a repository of knowledge of Opaz' people.


4. After various machinations, the repository opens itself to Kaena, with conflict all around her.


5. Will the disputes among the groups be resolved?


3. Conclusions
1. One line summary: Relentlessly ugly and poor animation meets nearly opaque script.
2. Two stars of five


4. Scores
1. Art/Animation: 2/10  There is seriously too much negative space is the artwork for most of the scenes, rather like the more disgusting parts of the Alien series, or most of H. R. Giger's paintings or sculptures.  It is mostly dark, dull, depressing, surreal, and hideous. Other parts of the film are overly bright and washed out.  Neither of these habits is attractive or 'eye candy' as I have seen this monstrosity described so often. Here and there I see serious frame jumps, the kind one sees in a flip book.


2. Sound: 2/10 Amazingly bad leveling.  Keep your hand near the volume control.  This detracted seriously from the voice acting.


3. Acting: 4/10 Richard Harris and Keith David were fine; Kirsten Dunst was much better than I expected.  The queen and so many others were just terrible.


4. Screenplay: 3/10 Next to opaque.  Exposition of motivations was a distant, never achieved goal.

20140131: Horror Review--Self Storage

Self Storage

1. Fundamentals, reception.
1. American live action feature length film, 2013, rated R, horror. Spoken word is in English.
2. IMDB: 3.2/10.0 from 149 audience ratings.
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 'No Reviews Yet..' and 0% liked it from 19 audience ratings.
4. Netflix: 2.6/5.0 from 20,144 audience ratings.
5. Written and directed by: Tom DeNucci.
6. Starring: Tom DeNucci as Jake, Eric Roberts as Walter, Michael Berryman as Trevor, Jonathan Silverman as Jonah, Nick Principe as Freddie, Gillian Williams as Sara-Marie.


2. Setup and Plot
1. Walter and Trevor have quite a nasty but lucrative business going in blackmarket organs.  They set up at self storage facilities, do some business, then move on.  They often supply Jonah, who has connections and access to lots of money.


2. Jake overhears Walter tell Trevor that they are leaving, and will fire Jake.  So Jake sets up a party at the facility.  In the process, he ruins the product that Walter and Trevor were going to sell to Jonah.  To make things even worse, Jonah is coming that same night with money and people to collect the organs and whatever else was involved.


3. When Walter and Trevor go to check the product, they find that Jake has more or less destroyed all the organs being carried by the kidnapped victims.  So the obvious choice is to harvest the organs from the drugged out fools at Jake's party.


4. The idiots continue to party.  Trevor starts knocking them out and bringing them in for harvesting.  After everyone else is captured or dead, Jake, Freddie, and Sara-Marie counter-attack using weapons stolen from someone's storage locker.


5. Who will come out of this happy (or alive)?  Jake and friends?  Jonah's mob?  Walter and Trevor?  None of the above?


3. Conclusions
1. One line summary: Half glorification of drugs and booze; half about involuntary organ harvesting.
2. One star of five.


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 5/10 Varies from sub-VHS quality to nice and clear.  This is a bit jarring at times.


2. Sound: 3/10 OK, except that the actors speak now and then, and the incidental music is played.


3. Acting: 2/10 This is a vanity film for Tom DeNucci, who is not even convincing as a drugged out idiot.  Veterans Eric Roberts and Michael Berryman certainly know how to act, but the weak star/director/writer did not get much out of them.  Jonathan Silverman seemed to phone his performance in, but from a separate movie.


4. Screenplay: 2/10 The ideas were not too bad, but the execution was utter and complete nonsense.  The ending was the worst, worse than all the rest of this wretched film put together.

20140131: Horror Review--Kill Theory

Kill Theory

1. Fundamentals, reception.
1. American live action feature length film, 2009, NR, 85 minutes, horror, slasher.
2. IMDB: 5.6/10.0 from 4,198 audience ratings. Estimated budget, 6 million USD.
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 'No reviews yet,' 27% liked it from 986 audience ratings.
4. Netflix: 3.3/5.0 from 119,556 audience ratings.
5. Directed by: Chris Moore.
6. Starring: Agnes Bruckner as Jennifer, Patrick John Flueger as Michael, Taryn Manning as Alex, Theo Rossi as Carlos, Teddy Dunn as Brent, Don McManus as Dr. Karl Truftin.


2. Setup and Plot
1. The picture opens with Walter getting out of a psychiatric institution after three years for killing three of his friends.  Walter and Karl discuss this for nuances.  Karl wants to see how well Walter does in the next year, and schedules regular visits.


2. The film transitions to another environment where Walter can execute another kill-the-group exercise.  Brent and Amber, Michael and Jennifer, Carlos and Nicole, the heavy loner Freddie, and the biker girl Alex.  The group celebrates (early) their upcoming graduation at a remote vacation house that  belongs to Michael's family.


3. After a night of drinking and storytelling, they retire for the evening.  Nicole gets up to get a snack, and Walter grabs her.  He offers her the choice of killing Carlos or being murdered herself.  She chose the latter; Walter records the whole thing, then throws Nicole's corpse through a window onto Carlos.  Michael tries to get his father's rifle from the basement, but Walter had already taken it,  In its place he left many photos from the preceding two weeks.  Walter calls them on a radio and tells him that they have to kill each other for any of them to survive (winner take all or all lose).  Michael and Carlos go out to get the pistol in his father's boat.  The boat has been sunk, and Carlos gets badly injured on the way back.  Michael leaves Carlos there since Michael thought he was dead.


4. What's left?  It's classic elimination derby.  Whom can one trust?  Do we have to hear every detail from Walter's first killing spree?


3. Conclusions
1. Seems that they made absolutely no plans, much less concerted attempts to find the killer and take him out.  Of course, Walter had most of this planned out so that they would feel powerless and confused.
2. One line summary: Shows the bad decision making of the victims in an elimination derby.
3. Two stars of five


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 10/10 Nicely shot, including the majority of the film which was shot in low-light.


2. Sound: 8/10 No real problems.


3. Acting: 3/10 Lousy.  I've seen worse, but not too much worse.


4. Screenplay: 3/10 Ordinary.  The victims are very unimaginative, which eliminated most of their possibilities.  As it was, the victims did most of the killer's work for him.  The histrionics were not all that interesting, and did not illustrate motivations all that well.  For instance, why did these 'friends' have so much energy devoted to killing each other in very messy, inefficient ways?

20140131: Action Review--Man of Tai Chi

Man of Tai Chi

1. Fundamentals, reception.
1. American/Chinese/Hong Kong live action feature length film, 2013, rated R, 105 minutes, action, drama. Spoken word is Cantonese, English, and Mandarin.
2. IMDB: 6.1/10.0 from 12,640 audience ratings. Estimated budget, 25 million USD.
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 71% on the meter; 50% liked it from 8,679 audience ratings.
4. Netflix: 3.6/5.0 from 46,686 audience ratings.
5. Directed by: Keanu Reeves.  Screenplay as Michael G. Coney.
6. Starring: Keanu Reeves as Donaka Mark, Chen Lin-Hu as Tiger Hu Chen, Karen Mok as Sun Jingshi, Simon Yam as Superintendent Wong, Qing Ye as Qingsha.


2. Setup and Plot
1. Donaka runs an ongoing illegal fight-to-the-death contest with high stakes.  He's on the lookout for new talent a fair amount of the time.


2. Tiger is an advanced Tai Chi student.  He participates in some martial arts contests to show that Tai Chi can be used to express power.  Donaka views one of his matches, and sends Tiger an invitation to meet.  Tiger puts on his best suit and goes to the meeting.


3. He soon finds himself alone in a room designed for fights.  Fighting he does.  Donaka encourages him to fight for pay, but Tiger demurs...it's not the Tai Chi way.  Tiger gets outside pressure.  The dojo he has been with for years, which has stood for six centuries, is to be torn down unless monies are produced to effect repairs to keep developers away.


4. So Tiger starts fighting for money.  He also starts enjoying it, perhaps a bit too much.  His efforts get the dojo a temporary reprieve.  However, the developers telegraph that they will continue to pursue the property in order to demolish the dojo and rebuild expensive structures.


5. A police woman (Chief Inspector Jing Si) has been after Donaka from the beginning of the film.  Will Tiger be the weak link that brings Donaka down?


6. By the time Donaka brings in Tiger for a professional fight against two opponents in front of a select upscale crowd, Tiger is ready to perform no matter what.  He does not do all that well at first, but rises to the occasion, defeating two experienced fighters at once.


7. In his next public fight, he breaks some bones, and is disqualified.  Donaka is pleased.  Tiger goes back to the dojo and attempts to overpower his master.  Tiger has grown quite a bit in fighting skill, so his master no longer can overpower him, but neither can Tiger defeat his master.  Also, his master's attacks have effects after the fact, and leave Tiger with bruises.  His master warns him to meditate; otherwise he path will lead to destruction.


8. The agency in charge of development changes their mind again, and recommends development over the demolished dojo.  Their excuse is that Tiger was disqualified from his last legitimate fight.  Oi.  Tiger asks Donaka for a fight; he gets one against Yuri Romanov, a mercenary 'killing machine.'  Tiger defeats him and barely restrains himself from killing him.  Donaka encourages him to finish the job.  Tiger does not.  Oh, my.  Donaka enters the battle room and breaks Yuri's neck.


9. Jing Si finds the location of the fight, but is about 20 minutes too late.  Tiger contacts her, but his telephone was bugged.  Donaka knows, and will have surprises.


10. So, who comes out well in this one?  Anyone?  Does Tiger survive?  Do we care?


3. Conclusions
1. One line summary: The two miscast lead actors render the film's value inert.
2. One star of five.


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 8/10 Well shot for the most part.  The colour palettes are a bit off now and then.


2. Sound: 2/10 Be sure to view this film on a device that allows subtitles.  Much of the film is in Mandarin and Cantonese.


3. Acting: 0/10 The performance of Chen Lin-Hu as Tiger was just as unbelievable as Keanu Reeves as Donaka.  Those two casting choices were just ridiculous.  The fake fights did indeed look fake.  In a Jackie Chan film, it's the same, but the fake fights accentuate Jackie's warmth and humour.  This deadly bore of a film is not a comedy, and the fake look of the fighting is a terminal detriment.  One is reminded of the terminal mistake of casting Jaden Smith and Keanu Reeves in the hideous remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still.


4. Screenplay: 2/10 This is a fairly straightforward plot, nothing new, with good production values.  Unfortunately, the two leads just cannot execute it.  The end fight was just absolute bovine scatology, ludicrous and insulting to the viewer.  Telekinesis?  You've jumped the shark, fellows. Unless this was meant to be Dragonball Z, of course.

20140131: Animation Review--Heavy Metal

Heavy Metal

1. Fundamentals, reception.
1. Canadian animated feature length film, 1981, rated R, dark fantasy, eroticism and horror.
2. IMDB: 6.7/10.0 from 18,250 audience ratings. Estimated budget, 9.3 million USD; aspect 1.37
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 58% on the meter; 68% liked it from 38,157 audience ratings.
4. I watched this on Crackle on the last day of its current run.
5. Directed by: Gerald Potterton.
6. Starring: (voice actors) Don Francks, Caroline Semple, Richard Romanus, and many more, see imdb listing .


2. Setup and Plot
1. The film follows the Loc-Nar (glowing green orb) that contains the personification of ultimate evil in the universe.  The orb corrupts whatever it stays near.


2. First story ('Harry Canyon'): a professor finds the orb while excavating.  The professor is killed by gangsters.  His daughter is rescued by a cab driver, Harry Canyon.  She disappears on him overnight.  Next morning, everyone wants to talk to Harry, so he half heartedly looks for her.  Loved the humour here.


3. Second story ('Den'): an idiot who experiments with lightening obtains the globe.  During a storm, his apparatus catches lightening; the globe adds its own power.  The experimenter is transported to another planet and perhaps another time.  He is in a new body.  He rescues a woman from being sacrificed.  They get kidnapped by an odd group that takes him to the leader of the revolution, whatever that is.  This person demands that he steal the Loc-Nar from the queen.


4. Third story ('Captain Sternn'): set on a space station orbiting a planet that resembles Jupiter.  A space officer, Captain Sternn is on trial.  He thinks he has an 'angle' with a janitor Hanover Fiste.  The Loc-Nar takes over Fiste, who delivers damning evidence against Sternn.


5. Fourth story ('B-17'): set on a World War II vintage B-17.  The Loc-Nar follows the plane.  It kills the crew one by one.  The pilot parachutes out.  Does he survive?


6. Fifth story ('So Beautiful and So Dangerous'): set in Washington, DC.  Mutations have been appearing on Earth.  Is this because of interference from forces from outer space?  An expert says no at a top secret meeting in the Pentagon.  The expert starts to mutate himself; he attacks the voluptuous secretary taking notes.  Then aliens abduct them.  Can this turn out well?


7. Sixth story ('Taarna'): set on another world.  The Loc-Nar enters a volcano, which it causes to erupt in green vomit-like lava.  This mutates those who are trapped in it.  The non-mutants are about to be overrun by the mutants.  An elder calls for Taarnak (of the line of Tarrak) to come defend them.  It is their sworn duty, after all.  She answers the call after those she was to defend are all slaughtered.  Her mission becomes vengeance.


8. The preparation scene in Taarna was beautiful, as was the destruction of Loc-Nar and the transfer of the mission to the new Taarakian.


9. This is quite a classic.


3. Conclusions
1. One line summary: Anthology of animated shorts from the comic; great set of background music.
2. Four stars of five.


4. Scores
1. Art/Animation: 5/10 Good for 1981, but does not age well.  At all. Has some of the same styles as Bakshi's Wizards, 1977, for instance, and that is not a compliment.


2. Sound: 10/10 Outstanding.  The music is still good.  For a list of performers, see this page; look in the User Reviews.


3. Voice: 7/10 OK.


4. Screenplay: 8/10 The last segment, Taarna, was the best.  I would give it high marks for heart, humour, and heroism; its use of a female hero was cleansing and cathartic, rather than PC nonsense.  This segment almost carries the entire film.  The first and second stories were good for humour, and advanced the story overlying the segments a bit.  The third and fourth stories were not as good as the others.  The fifth was just a waste.

20140131: Action Review--Heavy Metal 2000

Heavy Metal 2000

1. Fundamentals, reception.
1. Canadian/German animated feature length film, 2000, rated R, 86 minutes, action, animation, fantasy, music.  Spoken word is in English.  Aspect, 1.85
2. IMDB: 5.3/10.0 from 5,005 audience ratings.  Estimated budget, 15 million USD.
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 0% on the meter; 37% liked it from 11,804 audience ratings.
4. I watched this on Crackle on its last day for a while.
5. Directed by:
6. Starring: Michael Ironside as Tyler, Julie Strain as Julie, Billy Idol as Odin, Pier Paquette as Germain St. Germain, Sonja Ball as Kerrie.


2. Setup and Plot
1. An ordinary space miner named Tyler touches a shard of a glowing rock that gives him a hunger for power and a thirst for immortality.  He attacks a space colony, Eden, to kill people and collect survivors who have a precious substance in their blood.  Unfortunately for Tyler, he kidnapped Kerrie, but left alive her sister Julie.  Germain was in his crew, but when Germain tries to protect Kerrie, Tyler leaves Germain behind.


2. Jule dragoons Germain, and they follow Tyler on his journey to a jump point.  They hitch a ride just before Tyler's ship enters the wormhole (the 'jump point').  Tyler tries to kill them.  The results are really bad for both ships.  They crash on a nearby planet where Julie meets Odin and his rock-like assistant.  Odin is in search of the 'Key' (the glowing rock) which Julie is oblivious to.


3. Tyler becomes leader of a local race of lizard people.  He searches for the pool of the pure substance that will give him immortality.  Odin leads Julie to Tyler's ship, where she rescues Kerrie.  They go back to the city that protects the pool and the chamber of immortality.


4. Will Julie and her new friends be able to protect the city from the lizard horde?  Will they keep Tyler from his goal?


3. Conclusions
1. Favourite quote: 'how do you lose a six foot bitch with a talking rock?'
2. One line summary: Not PC, guns blazing, swords slashing, revenge, spaceships, ample bosoms, aliens, and metal soundtrack.
3. Four stars of five.


4. Scores
1. Art/Animation: 6/10 Varies from barely competent to good.  It seems a bit weak for a film made around 2000.  Also, the use of mixed productions modes (some flat, some hand drawn, some done by export of 3d modelling) is rather distracting.


2. Sound: 8/10 The sound levels might have been a bit better balanced.  The metal background music seemed to be kept too low compared to the sound levels for gunfire, explosions and voices.


3. Voice: 10/10 Michael Ironside, Julie Strain, Billy Idol, and Pier Paquette were all fine.


4. Screenplay: 7/10 The twin quests for revenge and for immortality move the story right along.  However, the story lacks the powerful heart and heroism of the first film.

20140130: Horror Review--Toad Road

Toad Road

1. Fundamentals, reception.
1. American live action feature length film, 2012, NR, 75 minutes, horror, thriller.
2. IMDB: 5.2/10.0 from 242 audience ratings.
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 67% on the meter; 52% liked it from 118 audience ratings.
4. Netflix: 2.3/5.0 from 15,103 audience ratings.
5. Written and directed by: Jason Banker.
6. Starring: James Davidson as James, Sara Anne Jones as Sara, Whitleigh Higuera as Whitleigh, Jamie Siebold as Jamie, Scott Rader as Scott.


2. Setup and Plot
1. The film opens to a group of drug addicts having fun with each other while getting high or coming down.  That's about the first 45 minutes worth of 75 minutes total.


2. James and Sara go to Toad Road to see what's there.  Supposedly there are seven gates, and if one goes through all seven, one gets entrance to hell.


3. At the first gate, one can feel something pulling at you, and wanting you gone, but you cannot see them.  At the second gate, one starts to hear things.  Just after the third gate, one starts to see things; the voices become visible.  Just after the fourth gate, things around you start to die; leaves start to fall and the like.  Just after the fifth gate, everything gets cold, but you feel warm and powerful.


4. At this point in the description by Sara, it had started snowing, and a CGI gate was visible.  James catches up to Sara.  The narration describing the gates continues.  Time supposedly changes after passing through the fifth gate.


5. At this point, James is separated from Sara.  He looks for her a bit, and calls her name repeatedly.  He gives up and takes a long walk home.  His keys do not work.  After some time he gets in touch with two of his druggie friends.  They tell him that he has been gone for months.  No one cares that he has been gone that long, but Sara is a different matter since she has roots with people and institutions that care about her.


6. Do we see Sara again?  Does James do anything to find her?


3. Conclusions
1. The characters in this mess are the best argument for birth control that I have ever seen.
2. One line summary:  Drug user investigates a path to hell, but does not remember it.
3. One star of five.


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 0/10 Bipolar, to say the least.  On the one hand, some long stretches are hideously bad: fuzzy, poorly lit, poorly framed, overexposed and alternately underexposed, shaky.  On the better side, sections of the film have fine focus, good depth of field, nice framing and no camera shake.


2. Sound: 3/10 A real detriment.


3. Acting: 0/10 Non-existent.


4. Screenplay: 2/10 Next to worthless.  There is about 90 seconds of plot here, yet the film drags on endlessly for 75 minutes.  Filming drug addicts putting out their cigarettes in vomit is of no value whatsoever.

20140130: Movie Review--Persona

Persona

1. Fundamentals, reception.
1. Japanese live action feature length film, 2008, NR, SciFi, action.
2. IMDB: 6.8/10.0 from 20 audience ratings.  Spoken language is in Japanese. Subtitles in English.
3. Rotten Tomatoes: not even a stub web page.
4. Netflix: 2.4/5.0 from 3,858 audience ratings.
5. Written and directed by: Tatsuro Kashihara.
6. Starring: Mami Yamasaki as Hiyori, Masato Hagiwara as Koichiro Kiba, Sawa Suzuki as Sayoko Kiba.


2. Setup and Plot
1. Hiyori is the subject of experiments that look more like torture than anything else.  She escapes from the lab early on, and tumbles across the young doctor Koichiro.  A squad of men show up and hustle Hiyori into a van.


2. Koichiro's wife Sayoko tells him she is going on a business trip.  As it turns out, she works for LIS, which is doing the experiments on Hiyori.  These experiments involve a mental resonance which allows for a bit of personality transference.


3. Yeah, sure, right, everyday.  Perhaps one should keep going if one can still suspend disbelief.


4. Hirori escapes again, this time with some of Sayoko's personality.  She seeks out Koichiro, her most trusted ally.


5. It is no surprise that they are soon on the run.  There is a bit of fighting action involved. Eventually, they have to go back and fix things up with the sleeping Sayako.


6. Will our heroes accomplish all their goals?


3. Conclusions
1. One line summary: Poorly made Japanese export that is slow, boring, non-engaging.
2. One star of five.


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 2/10 Poor, VHS quality or worse.  Grainy, pixelated images, washed out appearance, camera shake.


2. Sound: 6/10 The incidental music sucks rocks.


3. Acting: 2/10 There was acting? Poor fight choreography.


4. Screenplay: 2/10 Enough of the girl fighter PC nonsense.  Very little story spread over 84 minutes.

20140130: Horror Review--Rosalind Leigh

The Last Will and Testament of Rosalind Leigh

1. Fundamentals, reception.
1. Canadian live action feature length film, 2012, NR, 80 minutes.
2. IMDB: 5.5/10.0 from 1,542 audience ratings.
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 'No reviews yet,' 32% liked it from 201 audience ratings.
4. Netflix: 2.8/5.0 from 149,603 audience ratings.
5. Written and directed by: Rodrigo Gudino.
6. Starring: Aaron Poole as Leon Leigh, Vanessa Redgrave as Rosalind Leigh, Julian Richings as Rahn Brothers, Stephen Eric McIntyre as Preacher, Charlotte Sullivan as Anna.


2. Setup and Plot
1. Leon returns to the house he grew up in after his mother dies.  They had been apart for many years.


2. Leon spent lots of time in the past with his mental health professional, who has helpful suggestions about his 'bump in the night' experiences at the house.  The house is opulent and chocked full of reminders of Leon's childhood.  There are audio and video tapes from a mystery cult, including one about communications with the dead.  Eventually, Leon finds a room full of religious statues, candles, stained glass and the like.


3. The cult is "God's Messengers" which Leon researches on the web.  He consults his security company by phone, then online, when he seems to have an animal intruder.  They see something in the surveillance data, but cannot make out what it is.  Then he loses online connection.


4. Leon seems to see a lot of things after that, but does he?


3. Conclusions
1. One line summary: Fine production values, but cheap jack script; massively bad ending.
2. One star of five


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 10/10 Amazingly beautifully done, in low light or high.


2. Sound: 10/10 Well done, sometimes quite atmospheric.


3. Acting: 5/10 Veteran actor Aaron Poole gave a fine performance.  Film legend Vanessa Redgrave was OK as a voice actor.  However, the script was so bad that the performances mattered not.


4. Screenplay: 0/10 Five minutes of a bad plot stretched beyond breaking over eighty minutes.  I certainly hope the director is not funded again unless he has strong oversight.

20140130: Horror Review--Donner Pass

Donner Pass

1. Fundamentals, reception.
1. American live action feature length film, 2012, rated R, 86 minutes.
2. IMDB: 4.6/10.0 from 1,480 audience ratings.  Estimated budget: 800,000 USD; aspect, 1.85
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 'No score yet,' 8% liked it from 93 audience ratings.
4. Netflix: 3.0/5.0 from 62,031 audience ratings.
5. Directed by: Elise Robertson.  Written by R. Scott Adams and Elise Robertson.
6. Starring: Desiree Hall as Kayley, Eric Stocklin as Thomas, Colley Bailey as Mike, Adelaide Kane as Nicole, John Kassir as James Michael Epstein, Elise Robertson as Dead Mother, Krystal Davis as Valerie, Antonio Trischitta as Brody, Brandon Morales as A. J., Dominic Devore as Derek.


2. Setup and Plot
1. We start with a re-imagining of the Donner party's problems in the mountains in 1846.  The story is re-told in a bit of a different light.


2. In the present, Thomas and four friends head toward his parents' cabin in the woods, which is coincidentally near Donner Pass.  Three more people the group knows show up and bully their way in, indirectly making Thomas break his promise about occupancy.


3. The final roster ends up being Thomas, Kayley, Mike, Nicole, Brody, Valerie, Derek, and A. J.  During the first night's stay, there is an extra three inches of snow.


4. Brody goes for beer, and does not come back.  Thomas, Mike, and Kayley go look for him.  Kayley thinks she sees him before they start out, but is not sure.  They find Brody's car, somewhat broken up, with plenty of blood splatter inside the car, and some outside.  Soon enough they find Brody with his guts ripped out.  Could this possibly become a pattern?


5. Meanwhile, Derek and Nicole discuss Nicole's date rape by A. J.  I did not see how that was going to go forward without a confession (highly unlikely) or admissible video evidence.  Derek and Nicole turn out to be rather cold blooded themselves, but are not the root of the problems.


6. Does anyone survive this elimination derby?


3. Conclusions
1. Indie vanity film for Elise Robertson.  Oi, the ending telegraphs sequel; let us hope not.
2. One line summary: Gore, slasher, soft R, teen elimination derby with zero likeable characters.
3. One star of five.


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 7/10 Too dark much of the time.


2. Sound: 7/10 Mostly OK, but was not the asset it might have been.


3. Acting: 0/10  Terrible, stem to stern.  More or less bad high school play level.  Several of the actors look close to thirty, but act like bad tempered, entitled delinquents.


4. Screenplay: 2/10 Standard teen elimination derby, with a weak link to the Donner party historical events. Neither interesting nor compelling.  Even the gratuitous nudity had me wondering how it fit into the story.  Of course, it did not.

20140129: Horror Review--Gallowwalkers

Gallowwalkers

1. Fundamentals, reception.
1. American/British live action feature length film, 2013, rated R, 92 minutes, action, horror, zombies, thriller, zombies, Western.
2. IMDB: 3.7/10.0 from 3,615 audience ratings. Estimated budget: 17 million USD; aspect 2.35
3. Rotten Tomatoes: 'No score yet,' and 10% liked it from 638 audience ratings.
4. Netflix: 2.9/5.0 from 201,729 audience ratings.
5. Directed by: Andrew Goth.  Written by: Andrew Goth and Joanne Reay.
6. Starring: Wesley Snipes as Aman, Riley Smith as Fabulos, Kevin Howarth as Kansa, Tanit Phoenix as Angel, Steven Elder as Apollo Jones.


2. Setup and Plot
1. Aman's mother was a nun.  To ensure her son's safety, she makes an unholy deal with a supernatural force.  As he grows up, he becomes an invincible gunman.  After his wife is raped, he goes for vengeance.  Unfortunately, anyone he kills comes back as a zombie.


2. That includes the group of five who raped his beloved.  Their leader is Kansa, who has kept his group together in the after the first death period.  Kansa is looking for the group that Aman's mother belongs to, and San Diablo, where they guard the gate between heaven and hell.  In the meantime, Kansa and his group gather up the defenseless to kill them to steal their skins and hair for their re-use.


3. After Kansa obtains a map to San Diablo, the climactic battle is setup.


4. Will the gate remain sealed?  Will the zombies ever be put down permanently?


3. Conclusions
1. Too many genres.
2. One line summary: Western zombie horror, oh my.
3. Three stars of five


4. Scores
1. Cinematography: 8/10 Mostly fine.


2. Sound: 8/10 No problems.


3. Acting: 5/10 Wesley Snipes and Kevin Howarth were rather good, but Riley Smith and most of the others were not.


4. Screenplay: 6/10 The plot did not make a whole lot of sense, and had too much narration, but at least it moved from beginning to end.


5. SFX: 5/10 Not the best, often not convincing at all.