zoeisdead2002 Reviews

A Nightmare on Elm Street (2010)

Whats so great about Jack Earl Haley? and No more remakes

[23 June 2010]

I don't think he's a good actor and I didn't even think "Watchmen" was any good either. Is this a special kind of clique were we follow what everyone likes?

Lame.

This remake of Nightmare on elm street is as bad as the remake of: Dawn of the dead Friday the 13th amityville of horror the crazies Texas chainsaw massacre death race

...and whats this talk about making the movies more realistic then the originals? You can't make it anymore real with the digital cameras. Nothing looks that sharp or clean and if you wanna make it realistic; stop using slowmotion, shaky-cam, saturated colors and pretty actors.

I would talk about Nightmare on elm street right now but I'm to ticked off about the results of an industry that won't stop being greedy by making money off other peoples ideas. They went overboard and it needs to stop.

Blood: The Last Vampire (2009)

Despite its flaws, the good does outweigh the bad

[8/10 · 21 June 2010]

For those who lived under a rock or haven't really gotten into the whole anime phase back when it was really roaring in the 90's with titles like wicked city, devilman, akira, ghost in the shell, Genocyber and ninja scrolls. Blood: the last vampire was one of the key anime films that tried breaking ground between the lines of animation and computers at the time when technology was getting advance. One of the signature looks of the film was the character Saya and her school girl outfit which is a staple of sexuality on the eastern side. Since then Blood has produced a TV anime series and imitators alike.....Now we have a movie which has its good moments but there are too many flaws to count, but before you decide to put this on your skip it list, let me tell you the good and bad stuff.

Good: Casting. You don't need to stretch your imagination far to know that Saya needs to be played by a beautiful young Asian girl and yes they do get that part right. The rest of the cast is give or take, you don't really care for them to be on screen for a long time so they don't stay too long to take away from the main event. Saya is pretty much the star of the show and it is only her that carries the movie. The rest of the cast are pretty much part of the body bag pile up.

Not so good: Special FX. Normally I would forgive a movie for bad special FX cuz come on! story comes first. The CGI feels weak compared to even low budget FX films which has more bad acting then bad effects. Though it doesn't take away from the performances and the fluid action scenes, you really feel that they could've took more time adding in shadows and texture. The gore FX is all CGI which most of todays films seem to be going at but I feel they should of added a squib here or two.

Okay: story. Saya's family is killed by the demons and she wants revenge!! How many times have we seen that in a tough chick action film? The story doesn't hurt the character or the film itself. She needs a reason to kill anyway, so no points off on the story.

What it needs: Better effects. To me this character is too cool for bad CGI, I was relieved to see a movie that wasn't so bland or fake like "Underworld" or so boring and lifeless like "Daybreakers". Blood is a 1 against a hundred type of film and those movies, especially with a girl in a school uniform, should always have good FX.

Worthy of a sequel?: Yes. It has flaws and some weak characters but I have no problem with Saya leaping into the darkness and fighting the armies of hell! If there should be a sequel, then so be it. Hopefully a better budget and FX would make it worth the while.

The Doom Generation (1995)

Not the best film but still worth a watch

[8/10 · 31 May 2010]

The first gregg araki film I ever watched was "Nowhere". I first thought it was trying to be too weird like David Lynch. Later on I took an interest in Araki cause this is a filmmaker that wants to be different and this is the kind of guy that knew what kind of music kids actually listened to and what their thoughts were.

Its hard not to miss all the metaphors and symbolisms in the film. Of course these interpretations are what makes a movie stand out. I could'nt say what strikes me the most about this film, I only watched it for the violence and nude scenes. I just saw it also as a satire on the teen genre and road movies. They cuss like sailors and have very little empathy for just about everything (with a little exception for the dog they ran over.)

The movie has three characters:

Amy blue Jordan white Xavier red

Their last names obviously references the American flag so I guess they represent todays American youth.

I've read about metaphors about Xavier being a devil and Jordan as an angel fighting over Amy blue who is in interpretation of the human race. I'll admit I didn't look at it that way when I first viewed the film. I just saw it as a straight forward indie film. With exaggerations of American pop culture and a 90's soundtrack. Of course I do like it that the film has layers of meaning and what araki wanted to convey in his messages.

Themes:

Every stranger they bumped into seem to know who Amy blue is and they call her by different names. They also have violent tendencies towards her.

666. I don't need to tell you what that symbol is about, it is used numerous times.

The feds who are after Amy blue for the murder of a store clerk. the men sitting across from each other are twins. This is a pun about them being a uniformed society.

Billboard signs messaging them about the rapture. Of course araki is satirizing Americas obsession with the end of the world. The world hasn't ended yet *knock on wood* but the perfect world Amy and Jordan created does end with his death. So the human race might not end anytime soon but each person has their own end that will eventually come.

In the end after Jordans death Amy and Xavier keep riding in spite of their traumatic event. Moving on is the only thing they can do. Xavier breaks the ice by offering her a bag of doritos.

The Ice Pirates (1984)

A well made underrated SCI-FI Romp

[9/10 · 20 April 2010]

Some people would call this a type of movie vehicle riding the star wars wave. I see it as a template that might of ended up influencing such series as Fire fly, Cowboy Bebop, and many other space themed western films after. Its funny and has its moments.

Most people would be turned off by the plot. They are pirates that steal ice cause of the galaxies limited supply of water. Not really spectacular but the comedy and witty dialog make up for the movie flaws. Robert urich is always cool as ever and the rest of his cast looked like they were having a good time with their characters.

They first get captured and sent to a factory that turns prisoners into unichs. They manage to escape with the help of a woman they first held hostage. Through out the story the dashing heroes are looking for her father who holds the secrets to a planet that has a limited supply of water. The bad guys wanna stop them so the Ice pirates break into action and you get that whole cat and mouse thing. its worth it though cuz I always give points to movies that have a good way of not taking themselves seriously and letting the audience in on the laugh.

House M.D. (2004–2012)

My two cents

[3/10 · 15 February 2010]

I'm not really an avid TV viewer like I use to be and the shows I use to watch were popular 10 years ago. House is a show I've watch a couple of times and at the end of every episode I really don't see the big appeal. Its a medical drama no different from ER, but ER seemed more realistic then House. Now lets talk about the character House: He is a brilliant doctor that doesn't seem to like anybody and yet somewhat still helps people but pisses them off at the end cuz he doesn't want to get emotionally attached. This character is boring and annoying and if he were my doctor, I don't care if he does have a cure for my problems, I'd beat him up for being a jerk. Not to mention the means he uses to solve the case doesn't seem reasonable for a guy who can care less if you crashed your plane into the sea or got shot the next day. He contradicts himself too much and complains a lot about his stupid leg problem and the fact that he's always alone. I have a solution to his loneliness problem; how about being more nice to people?

The supporting characters don't seem to have a spine in their body when confronting house and why does the boss keep him around? There are plenty more doctors that can do his job, probably a lot better. The patient cases are interesting but its always the same thing; they convulse and collapse and then convulse again, at the hospital they look fine then convulse again. House finds out the problem and insults them at the end. I'm not a big people person myself but come on! The show is repetitive and House seems like a pathetic person who should've shot himself a long time ago.

ANother problem is the diseases out there. There isn't a lot of cures out there, especially for sexually transmitted diseases and they talk about patients who get their medical problems by some mere chance of irony that represents their lifestyles that got them the disease in the first place. So its the patients fault for being sick. This is every episode in the show!! Thats why its repetitive!

WIthout further a saying, I think the show needs more interesting characters and have house try to understand the errors of his way cause, this guy is lame to me. He can find out that your allergic to metal by just looking at the house keys you scratch your head with everyday but can't find a cure for cancer. I can't wait for this boring series to end.

Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)

It just wasn't good, clear and simple

[6/10 · 29 December 2009]

I wrote a previous review on how Zatoichi the blind swordsman was way more superior then this film. I have to say I wish I wrote a better review since I was just trashing QT's work. Just to let everyone know, I like Tarantino's work and I love what he writes, but as I said in my other review for Zatoichi, There is a real thin line between Borrowing and complimenting a scene. Tarantino in the past has been accused of being too much of a plagiarizer. The plot of Reservoir dogs did borrow from City on fire and the black suits actually derived from John Woo's A Better Tomorrow 2. I can forgive that because Tarantino filmed them at a different pace and kind of rhythm were he took his time to give his characters detail and life. Kill Bill unfortunately did not carry any of that.

One of my biggest problems was Uma Thurman; she couldn't act worth a damn in the film. She said she tried imitating Clint Eastwood as she tries to invoke her toughness for the Bride. Heres the thing, Clint Eastwood looks tough and is convincing as a tough guy. Uma is a lanky woman who looks like she's worried about breaking her nails rather than busting any heads. The dialog was repulsive, I suppose people will tell me that he was trying to make it like those cheesy action films with the catchy yet corny one liners. He does do that and it is even more cheesy. Back then the writers were not trying to make it funny, they were serious about the dialog and even though its corny, at the time it wasn't to them.

My next big problem was O-ren Ishii, she just didn't convince me that she could rise to the ranks of head yakuza boss of the Japanese underworld. Her henchmen are also laughable and even unconvincing as Japanese as well. Have you noticed the Japanese actors performance are a little exaggerated and a bit too fakish? I think QT should've made O-ren into a man and he should've been played by Tadanobu Asano, an actor who can make a more convincing villain.

The next complaint is the violence, note this: I like watching action films that have well done and well shot violent sequences so I don't have a problem with violence on film. The problem with the violence in kill bill is that it really looks fake and dull. The part were Lucy liu slices the head of that one Yakuza and you see the blood shoot out like a sprinkler was not jaw dropping. Please know that I'm aware of films like Lone wolf and cub and also Ichi the killer, but those films let the blood shoot out and paint the entire screen red!! QT was holding back on the violence and I was so angry at the black and white sequence which was really stupid and doesn't live up to the brutality of films like "Battle Royale", "The Street Fighter", and "Riki-oh: The story of Ricky". He held back and made the action very tame. This is a tame action film in comparison to action giants like John Woo or Tsui hark.

QT also tried involving a Western element in the film, most notably adding music from ennio morricone, a man no stranger to Spaghetti Westerns. I like the music but was unnecessary for these type of scenes, even though I think they would have worked better in a John Woo film then kill Bill.

All around the movie is a mess and as a movie fan I can tell you just exactly what films he was borrowing from:

Zero Woman: Red Handcuffs Delinquent Boss Girl: Worthless to confess Fudoh The Game of death Lone Wolf and cub Ichi the Killer A Better Tomorrow 2 Rainy Dog Zatoichi

I know that most people would say that he is paying homages to these films and is sort of advertising them to the western audiences. The problem is these homages don't live up to these films brutality of violence and the emotional depth these characters feel when committing acts of violence. Maybe I should stop slamming QT but I just can't help myself, the movie was just not good and is slapped together with a bunch of scenes of other movies that did the scene way better then this one did.

why not just watch the original films to begin with then looking at a picture collage?

If I have to recommend a good movie from QT just watch Inglourios Basterds.

The Blind Swordsman: Zatoichi (2003)

Way Better than Kill Bill

[10/10 · 29 December 2009]

I'm pretty sure I will be chastised for attacking the holy grail of "in your face cinema" but please understand that as a movie fan and writer; I have to put in my two cents.

First off, I'm a huge fan of samurai films and enjoy the entire concept of loyalty and blood shed. Kill Bill should've been a shoe-in for my crave of slice and dice, but as I was leaving the theater I realized that it wasn't that good at all.

Now I know what you are thinking....Why compare Kill Bill with Zatoichi? I understand that Tarantino was paying homage to a genre that he enjoys watching greatly and that he was not only combining different styles from different movies; he was also writing a huge thank you note to the films he liked. I find that cool but there is a really thin line between borrowing and homages. I think he steered too close to borrowing then he did to tribute. Plus the acting from Uma was terrible.

Okay back to Zatoichi, to me Zatoichi is far more superior because one: its made by a man who knows a lot more about his culture and the genre more closely then what Quentin knows through just films. Kill Bill fails at its exaggerated depiction of Japanese culture. The way they act and talk seems a little more cartoonish and the characters seem to be cardboard cut outs of their own stereotypes. Zatoichi seems more authentic and focuses on the details of the sword and honor culture of that period. Zatoichi focused on diverse characters and their traits, where as in kill bill it really falls flat. The characters are unrealistic and are devoided of screen time and character outlet. Zatoichi takes its time and never singles out a character, even if he has small screen time.

The way they depict sword play is very differently. There was complaints in Kill Bill that the way the bride used her sword was in no way a samurai warrior holds or even swings it in that manner. Zatoichi was more reserved and delicate and the character deaths went more alongside the traditional deaths depicted in many samurai films, kill bill had sloppy editing of death scenes.

The character "The Bride" was just uninteresting and really unbelievable. The dialog was really cringy and her tough chick presence would make Toshiro Mifune laugh. Kitano is known for his tough guy image so taking on the role of a blind man that can easily kill was no problem to grasp.

The look of zatoichi was enriched in color and each set piece and costume designs complimented the spraying blood. Kill bill seemed like it didn't know what it wanted to be.

O ren ishii fails to deliver and convince you that she is the head boss of the Japanese crime underworld. Even one scene were she swipes a guys head off in the dinner sequences was really pointless and unshocking. Tadanobu asano's Ronin character was a more fitting antagonist who also has a background that deals with love and a score he can never settle. Kitano tries not only to build flaws within each character, but also expresses the damages they endured in life that made them either strong or timid. O ren ishii's background is really just a repeat of numerous other assassin characters that came out of the films that Tarantino liked a lot. The reason that is a big bust is that O ren's background is too cartoonish and I mean that literally and the cartoon sequence separates her background and the real character of the present, making the audience feel distant and unrealizable to her causes. Asano brings a character who is humiliated and broken which makes him a shell of a man who never flinches at the enemies he kills; He is a convincing killer and we can fear him too.

I have to say as a Tarantino fan, I have to give kill bill thumbs down cuz it borrowed too much and failed to live up to the films that really inspired that it. Zatoichi is a complimentary action film that lives up to the original zatoichi films and has a lot of Kitano flavor that is very noticeable and gives it its own stamp of originality. KILL BILL fails in that aspect because if you see the movies that influenced kill bill, you will see a movie that is trying to hard at being one messy collage film. Zatoichi is just too slicker. Forgive me Quentin but I'm giving the title over the Takeshi.

Wise Guys (1986)

A very well and overlooked comedy

[9/10 · 27 December 2009]

I like Danny devito. His sense of comedy and timing are really what make the movies he makes fun to watch. He is perfectly casted in "Wise guys" which is Brian De Palmas attempt at a comedy. The movie is pretty much a parody of the gangster genre which was popular in the 70's. The movie also stars Joe Piscapo as his bumbling Jewish friend Moe. The story is of these two men and their jobs in an organized crime syndicate were they are treated with low regards, even from their boss. harry (De vito) and Moe don't really have it easy in the mob. After screwing up on a simple job the main boss decides to have them both be given a contract to kill each other without either of them knowing. The comedy is good and fresh. particularly the scene at the church which still makes me crack up. Captain Lou albino is great as Frankie the fixer. The chemistry between Harry and Moe is well deserved in this buddy comedy. I think it was overlooked because they expected De Palma to make more serious oriented films that critics were used to like "Scarface", "The Untouchables" and "Carrie". Its disappointing that they passed on this film cuz:

1. I thought it was really good. 2. Each character got some good screen time 3. Its a great parody that even Scorsese would appreciate 4. De vito is just funny and thats always a plus.

If you like gangster films but prefer to see the genre itself be given fresh material, please look at this film, Its worth a rental.

The Replacement Killers (1998)

Action that falls really short

[6/10 · 15 December 2009]

I was just watching the movie and was hoping to give it a second chance since I really love the action films directed by John Woo and enjoyed the works of chow yun fat. The reason this movie falls flat is because it is not a John Woo movie. It was produced by Woo but he had no hand in the story. A story that really sucked too.

The story starts with chow walking to a night club. You know he needs to stretch out his double pistoled action arms for the beginning. I'm saying to myself "Okay he messes up some people so we are gonna get action." Heres the bad part, THE OTHER CHARACTERS. Every other character that comes out seems like a reproduction of another character we've seen in similar action film. Another faulty problem is the action scenes are really dull and boring compared to the rapid style like violence we see in John Woo's other films. In this film, Chow kills like 5 or 8 men in his usual style like persona. Whats the problem? In "The Killer" (Which replacement killers is a knock off of.) He is mowing down 20 to 30 henchmen and they die ugly deaths. Replacement killers doesn't have that heart pumping stop til you drop action that made Hong Kong Cinema legendary and often imitated.

Acting by chow isn't bad but he doesn't have a lot to go on. He really doesn't. At least Jackie chans US action vehicles have him as his usual self. in replacement killers he's just not dynamic or persuasive as a cold blooded killer. Mira sorvino is also misused, I like her acting but the writers should've looked over the script again to realize that her character seems more of a comical sidekick then a sexy love interest. The Asian gangsters are very wooden and very uninteresting. They don't know how to write them in. In John woo's films they are just regular people with different personalities and interest. In this film they are all stereotypically the same. Michael Rooker really sucked in this movie so I won't talk about him. Danny Trejo is in it but isn't used as he is in "desperado" playing the sophisticatedly cool and deadly Navas.

Overall this movie is no John Woo film. I recommend "Hard Boild" "The Killer" "A better tomorrow" part 1 and 2, "Bullet in the head" and his American vehicles "Face off" and "Broken Arrow". I also recommend just sticking to Hong Kong films if you want action that is really gut gripping and has stunts that'll blow CGI out of the water. Sorry Antoine, just let Woo do all the action.

Loose Cannons (1990)

I absolutely liked it

[9/10 · 27 November 2009]

It was funny and witty and Gene Hackman and Dan Akyroyd are balls of laughter in the film. I'm a fan of buddy cop films, I always look forward to a buddy cop film, from 48 hours to lethal weapon and the dirty harry series; the buddy cop films are a blast.

Dom Deluise is hilarious, a Mel Brooks regular putting in that usual fat charm that made him funny in the first place to good use in this typical but funny caper.

The story is as clichéd as what you see in an 80's/90's cop film; A murder was committed and two cops with different personalities learn to cope with their differences to break the case and shoot-up bad guys. Now I can't say its original but I like the shoot em ups and this was a good shoot em up film. The car chases were inventive and the scene of the train being hijacked from men on helicopters was a well directed action scene. It focused on the humor but didn't ignore the action. The acting was good, Hackman is always great to watch on screen and Dan is a good partner combination.

The Boondock Saints II: All Saints Day (2009)

Stop making this crap

[1/10 · 17 November 2009]

I know I'm gonna be chastised as hell but I just can't stand it. The first was a god awful wanna be Charles bronson film with Dialogue that would make Tarantino cry. Troy Duffy is a schmuck and a no good copycat director. This is a sham of a film and I like ridiculous crap but this film is just wrong. I don't think I have to describe the acting and the cardboard cut characters to describe how bad it is. The story is a played out Death Wish movie with religious chants that the pope wouldn't even approve of, not to mention that the gangster film genre is as played out as a soap opera or a pop song on MTV. WHat is wrong with troy Duffy? Can he see that nobody likes his films and that the only people that go watch them are a bunch of annoying frat boys who probably devoured too many brain cells with alcohol that they can't even tell what makes a good film or not.

I won't talk about the plot cause like in the matrix when the boy tells keanu that "there is no spoon" he should mention to people thinking about watching this movie should know that "there is no Plot." Even compared to 1960's action films this movie doesn't match up and I've seen films that go back into the 1900's.

Some people say that the movies highlight was Willem Dafoe playing the flamboyant investigator who apparently doesn't have a problem with insulting gays considering he's gay himself. Yeah.....Well even though I like Willem dafoe and I think he was missused for the first film, he decided not to jump on board for the sequel and "I wonder why?" So now the director decides to put in Julie Benz as the replacement. Some people will either know her from Rambo 4 or the dexter series. Why was she cast? WHy was a great talent like dafoe cast and see his talent get wasted away? I'm not gonna bore you with the plot or what is going on. I only watched it so I can have the right to put in my two cents and this crap didn't make any sense to me. If this is were the popularity of films is heading to then I just feel bad about cinema itself to see crap like the boondock saints get notoriety when it doesn't deserve any recognition. Troy Duffy you are an abomination to Celluloid.

The Dark Knight (2008)

I ain't that impressed

[4/10 · 4 August 2008]

Just for the record I'm not the biggest batman fan, even though I liked the tim burton version and watched the cartoon shows doesn't mean squat. I hated that awful batman beyond, the other batman sequels. So I'm 50/50 on batman. To me when I saw batman begins I was only anticipating a bad movie considering the fact that I did not enjoy any of Joel Schulmacher versions. When I finally saw batman begins I couldn't help but vomit. Why was this s**t a hit? I went to go see the sequel only cause I was on a date and she loved the Joker character, so thats how I ended up seeing the Dark knight film.

When I watched the dark knight I was still expecting a bad flick with that awful music score and the cheesy deadpan acting with its dialogue that can put an 8 year old to sleep. Well I knew it wasn't that great from the get go.

I'm aware of Heath ledgers tragic death. But a movie is still a movie and I hate the fact that they are overhyping it cause of his death and that makes me sick.

The movie was downright disappointing to me. I apologize to all the comic book aficionados but I wasn't impressed.

1. The plot of the movie seems kind of out there: Manipulating a campaign to cause havoc? Like people give a crap about politics.

2. The Joker is overrated. Heath ledger didn't give a bad performance but the character of the joker is a far departure from all the other jokers. To me all I saw was "the Crow" with green hair. Whats with that thing he does with his tongue? As for his scars, they just remind me of the character "Kakihara" from ichi the killer. So I didn't get any kind of entertainment from the joker.

3. Batmans voice: Come on!! Thats the most laughable voice I ever heard on batman!! It sounds like he should be in a death metal band. I couldn't help but cringe. It sounded like fingers scratching against the chalk board.

4. Its boring music score. Your gonna tell me that it overshadows Danny elfman batman score? It was used in the damn cartoon!! The Danny elfman score is a work of music art. I don't even remember how the music went in this new batman film.

I can go on even further into why I didn't like this batman film but it'll be longer so I'll just end it in the ups I thought should be mentioned.

Twoface: Aaron Eckhart gave a great performance in a great re-introduction of the villain. Wheres his Oscar nom? Gary oldman: The man rules as commissioner gordan.

As far as I see it, even if it beats out titanic or new york city gets re-named Gotham city. I wouldn't buy this film on DVD or blu-ray even if the Joker has a gun to my head.

PS: Jack Nicholson still kicks Heaths ass!!