Movies205's Reviews and Discussion Thread, VOL 2.- THE SUMMER HAS RETURNED!

[Movies205]

Tom Savini! Not Sullivan! *shakes fist*

I guess I did see the first 'Return', did it have some punk girl making out with some guy in the cemetary?

Yes it did, sorry I'm mad tired, and I was too lazy to IMDB.com it... The Keys to Geekdom a.k.a. my mind is getting a bit rusty, I haven't talked bout B-Cinema horror in a while.

 

[Flexo]

Yes it did, sorry I'm mad tired, and I was too lazy to IMDB.com it... The Keys to Geekdom a.k.a. my mind is getting a bit rusty, I haven't talked bout B-Cinema horror in a while.

Well, at least we can all agree that the effects in Day were some of the neatest **** ever.

 

[Movies205]

Well, at least we can all agree that the effects in Day were some of the neatest **** ever.

We could, had I seen it, but I haven't... Day and Return of the Living Dead Parts 2 and 3, are the last bits I need ot see to complete that whole Zombie Saga, Zombie 2 is fun in it's own quirky way, but there's no need to go past that.

 

[블라스]

Forgiven.

You guys should play Dead Rising for the 360.
It's basically Dawn of the Dead in awesome videogame form.

 

[Movies205]

My bro 360 is on the fritz and I'm off to college on Saturday so... yeah Anyway I'm going to sleep, g'night

 

[블라스]

Night

 

[Carmine Falcone]

The Machinist

I really love the bleached look of that film. And it is probably Bales' finest performance since American Psycho.

And again, two more excellent review war Party.

 

[War Party]

I really love the bleached look of that film. And it is probably Bales' finest performance since American Psycho.

And again, two more excellent review war Party.

Thanks man. I'm on a role. I think I should review American Psycho, but I 'll do it after work.

 

[Mr.Webs]

The Phantom of the Opera (2004)
Directed by Joel Schumacher
Starring Gerard Butler, Emmy Rossum, Patrick Wilson, and Miranda Richardson
__________________________________________________

This nearly hundred year old tale of a gothic love triangle has not only been a favorite of mine, but has titilated countless people around the world for decades. Incarnations and adaptations of Gaston Leroux's novel has both failed and triumphed, one of the most famous being Andrew Lloyd Webber's Broadway version of the book, whick has raked in millions of dollars. In 2004, the film was made, based off of a musical based off of a novel......anyway, to those who don't know the famous story, here's a synopsis from IMDB.com. - Andrew Lloyd Webber's sumptuous musical comes to the screen in this film adaptation. Deformed since birth, a bitter man known only as the Phantom lives in the sewers underneath the Paris Opera House. He falls in love with the obscure chorus singer Christine, and privately tutors her while terrorizing the rest of the opera house and demanding Christine be given lead roles. Things get worse when Christine meets back up with her childhood acquaintence Raoul and the two fall in love. The Phantom decides to kidnap her and imprison her with him in his lair. Raoul is now the only one who can stop him. -

The acting is wonderful, and not just from a few select people. The entire cast does well in their role, if not perfect. Butler has been strutinized for being cast as Erik/The Phantom, but he was a fine choice. He portrays the anger, the dread in the character, yet when it's needed he provides the sympathy needed to keep the character grounded. Rossum goes from one emotion to another, and plays each one like a seasoned pro, despite her young age of sixteen. She plays the confused character of Christine to near perfection...she plays every single shade to a character that's possible, and she does it extremely well. Wilson plays the heroic Raoul, yet, despite what could've happened, he doesn't ham it up and make Raoul uninteresting. You root for him, and he matches up to Butler's presence. Richardson does a great job as Madame Giry, and the rest of the cast, such as Minnie Driver, make their roles their own.

The story is classic, rich, and poetic. Leroux was a genius...every piece of the story is brilliant, and anything that I disliked from the novel (Raoul's little priss character) is changed for the better in the film. Schumacher, who receives way too much blame, portrays the musical well on celluid, yet he does make many wrong decisions. But more on that later. Because first, I have to talk about the music...the most important part of any musical. And honestly, everyone's voice suits their character wonderfully. Rossum's angelic voice as the hunted goddess, Butler's baritone and rough voice for the ugly and black soul of the evil ghost, and Wilson's smooth, silk-like voice for the counter-balance of evil. The songs progress the story extremely well, the film just looks beautiful, the lyrics are simply great...it's good all around.

The worst thing of this film has, has, HAS, to be the lack of deformities on Erik/The Phantom's face. The story works because his face was so unbelievabley disturbing and haunting that people had to look away, close their eyes, faint, in order to get away from it. This film? He has probably a second-degree burn on the right-side of his face, and his hair is thinning. That's generally it....now, compare it to Chaney. I think you understand. Then, we have the mixed messages in the film, mostly Christine's understanding/viewpoint of the Phantom. Does she think he's the Angel of Music, or her father? This thought still bothers me, to this day. Plus, Schumacher makes the horrible mistake of trying to make the Phantom 'sexy'. The Phantom is not sexy...his voice could be, sure, but the character himself will never, and should never, be a sexy character.

In the end, it is a fantastic thing the watch. The characters are interesting, the songs are beautifully done, the songs are great to hear...sadly, it's so close to perfection, yet falls just short to Schumacher's shoddy direction choices.

Final Vote: 8.5/10

 

[The Hero]

I am a bad person.

I have yet to see the first two Return of the Living Deads, or Dead Alive.

I've seen Return of the Living Dead III.One of those unbelievably bad,"I can't believe I just watched what I watched" movies.

 

[Movies205]

I've seen Return of the Living Dead III.One of those unbelievably bad,"I can't believe I just watched what I watched" movies.

I heard it's pretty good, just very un-RotLD like... I mean it directed by the guy who did Reanimator, which is a cult classic, which I still need to see. Dead or Alive I wish I saw 4 years ago, I still enjoyed it and liked it quite a bit, but it would of been better then, when I Was going through my cult/b-movie stage

 

[블라스]

Ugh, I hate Re-Animator and people who love it and say "It's classic Lovecraft!! LOL" :rolleyes

 

[Movies205]

Ugh, I hate Re-Animator and people who love it and say "It's classic Lovecraft!! LOL" :rolleyes

You would, go watch another stephen chow flick with ****ty slapstick humor

 

[The Hero]

I heard it's pretty good, just very un-RotLD like...

It's a 90-minute WTF? about an emo zombie who cuts herself.I'm not making that up.

 

[Flexo]

It's a 90-minute WTF? about an emo zombie who cuts herself.I'm not making that up.

Yeah? Well in Return of the Living Dead 4, the main character's parents are turned into eeeevil cyborg zombies with machine gun hands.

 

[The Hero]

All in all,a great franchise.

 

[War Party]

You would, go watch another stephen chow flick with ****ty slapstick humor

This broke my heart. I hope your joking. And if not, that's ok.

 

[Movies205]

This broke my heart. I hope your joking. And if not, that's ok.

I thought Kung Fu-Hustle was great and I dug Shaolin Soccer, but his slap-stick is garbage, it's like cliche charictures of the three stooges, Chow excells in his wackiness and imagination, not slap-stick

 

[black_dust]

Severance
Cinema
Dir: Christopher Smith

This is the newest horror comedy film to come from the Uk now putting it both a Horror and a Comedy is where it went wrong i feel, but more about that in a sec.

When a weapons multi-national Palisade Defense reward their European sales division with a team-building weekend in the mountains of Eastern Europe, comedy blends with horror as the team fight first amongst themselves, and later for survival against a group of war-crazed killers intent on revenge.

This is from the Director that brought you Creep. A werid horror where a "thing" is in the london subway.

Severance starts out with a clip from half way into the film, you know as they do, so the slow start thats really there doesn`t bore the **** off you. With or without the kill at the start of the movie the opening is still boring, watching them on a bus ride into the middle of no where trying to have funny one linners thrown in there. They end up at a cabin in the middle of the woods and still not much going on. Some more "whitty" banter goes back and forth. It doesn`t really kick in until about 30-40 mins into the film!!! this is when they play paint ball and one of them

Spoiler

Gets their foot trapped in a bear trap and then rips his leg clean off after some slap stick moments

This is when it starts cooking because they know someone is out there after them. The kills after this are pretty dam cool i must admit and some of them funny as hell. The ending of the film i feel is weak as hell and tops it off with another joke....

This film doesn`t know what it is, a pure horror or a horror/comedy, it is! ment to be a comedy but i feel there is way to much of it. Now in Shaun of the dead they had the right mix of Gags and horror to make it classic. and with Dog Soliders (same type of thing) they had the right mix (more horror than gags)

It was very VERY! reliant on the loud scares to make you jump out of your seat, the ones where a guy walks in the background and the much does DUN!!!!! these were at least every 10 mins which is a poor and cheap way to make someone jump.
Also this film has the standard tit showing that most horror films have to have, would have been fine if they weren`t fake ****
The acting from most of these no name britsh (and one from Canada Laura Harris) actors was ok i guess nothing to rant and rave about they just plodded along in the film until it was their time to die...

So all in all, it was an ok movie not "The best British comedy of the year" as stated on the trailer. This is only because the best one is out next year which is Hot Fuzz with Edgar Wright. I feel it was just cashing in off Shaun of the dead and Dog Soldiers but didn`t do a very good job, the jokes/gags init were lame, and most of the horror was.

One thing good i will say about this movie tho is!!!.... When ever i watch a horror film im shouting out "FINISH HIM!!!!" because have of these people knock the bad guy out and then leave... and im always saying "If i were there i would have made sure he was dead!" and in this film they do that! Soon as the bad guy was down BAM!!!! bullet in the head and i thought that was the only cool thing about the film.

4/10

Sorry if it doesn`t make sense or has spelling mistakes but im going to bed!

 

[The Shape]

The Phantom of the Opera (2004)
Directed by Joel Schumacher
Starring Gerard Butler, Emmy Rossum, Patrick Wilson, and Miranda Richardson
__________________________________________________

This nearly hundred year old tale of a gothic love triangle has not only been a favorite of mine, but has titilated countless people around the world for decades. Incarnations and adaptations of Gaston Leroux's novel has both failed and triumphed, one of the most famous being Andrew Lloyd Webber's Broadway version of the book, whick has raked in millions of dollars. In 2004, the film was made, based off of a musical based off of a novel......anyway, to those who don't know the famous story, here's a synopsis from IMDB.com. - Andrew Lloyd Webber's sumptuous musical comes to the screen in this film adaptation. Deformed since birth, a bitter man known only as the Phantom lives in the sewers underneath the Paris Opera House. He falls in love with the obscure chorus singer Christine, and privately tutors her while terrorizing the rest of the opera house and demanding Christine be given lead roles. Things get worse when Christine meets back up with her childhood acquaintence Raoul and the two fall in love. The Phantom decides to kidnap her and imprison her with him in his lair. Raoul is now the only one who can stop him. -

The acting is wonderful, and not just from a few select people. The entire cast does well in their role, if not perfect. Butler has been strutinized for being cast as Erik/The Phantom, but he was a fine choice. He portrays the anger, the dread in the character, yet when it's needed he provides the sympathy needed to keep the character grounded. Rossum goes from one emotion to another, and plays each one like a seasoned pro, despite her young age of sixteen. She plays the confused character of Christine to near perfection...she plays every single shade to a character that's possible, and she does it extremely well. Wilson plays the heroic Raoul, yet, despite what could've happened, he doesn't ham it up and make Raoul uninteresting. You root for him, and he matches up to Butler's presence. Richardson does a great job as Madame Giry, and the rest of the cast, such as Minnie Driver, make their roles their own.

The story is classic, rich, and poetic. Leroux was a genius...every piece of the story is brilliant, and anything that I disliked from the novel (Raoul's little priss character) is changed for the better in the film. Schumacher, who receives way too much blame, portrays the musical well on celluid, yet he does make many wrong decisions. But more on that later. Because first, I have to talk about the music...the most important part of any musical. And honestly, everyone's voice suits their character wonderfully. Rossum's angelic voice as the hunted goddess, Butler's baritone and rough voice for the ugly and black soul of the evil ghost, and Wilson's smooth, silk-like voice for the counter-balance of evil. The songs progress the story extremely well, the film just looks beautiful, the lyrics are simply great...it's good all around.

The worst thing of this film has, has, HAS, to be the lack of deformities on Erik/The Phantom's face. The story works because his face was so unbelievabley disturbing and haunting that people had to look away, close their eyes, faint, in order to get away from it. This film? He has probably a second-degree burn on the right-side of his face, and his hair is thinning. That's generally it....now, compare it to Chaney. I think you understand. Then, we have the mixed messages in the film, mostly Christine's understanding/viewpoint of the Phantom. Does she think he's the Angel of Music, or her father? This thought still bothers me, to this day. Plus, Schumacher makes the horrible mistake of trying to make the Phantom 'sexy'. The Phantom is not sexy...his voice could be, sure, but the character himself will never, and should never, be a sexy character.

In the end, it is a fantastic thing the watch. The characters are interesting, the songs are beautifully done, the songs are great to hear...sadly, it's so close to perfection, yet falls just short to Schumacher's shoddy direction choices.

Final Vote: 8.5/10

I love that film. Being a huge Phan of the musical, novel, and movie incarnations, this was awesome.

My only true complaint is Gerard Butler's voice, which was horrid in comparison to anyone who's every portrayed the Phantom in the play. He did not have the range for the role. I understand that Shumacher was going for a "rock and roll" kind of voice, but it did not work well. Frankly, I don't see how anyone could be entranced by his voice. He also missed some of the most important notes in the musical.

Also, some lines were spoken instead of sung, which was lame.

Other than that, spectacular. The changes from stage to screen were perfectly fine, for the most part. It's a beautiful film.

8/10.

 

[Sandman138]

It's a 90-minute WTF? about an emo zombie who cuts herself.I'm not making that up.

Dude, it's awesome. A zombie love movie is a great concept.

Spoiler

The only problem I have with it is that I wanted the boyfriend to come to terms with it and the two of them to live together happily while he finds her food. That would have been awesome!

 

[Movies205]

Il'l need to check it out, I haven't read your spoiler, but I'll check the movie out... I still need to see RoftLD which was written by the same guy who wrote Night of the Living Dead hence why it's a sequal to NotLD...

 

[War Party]

American Psycho (2000) (Very long review, sorry)
Director: Mary Harron
9/10

I wasn't sure what to think the first time I saw this movie, having not then read the book it's based (albeit somewhat loosely) on. I actually found myself grinning and even laughing aloud while watching this movie, which made me feel sort of guilty...was I supposed to laugh when people were getting butchered gruesomely right and left? Was it really a vicious slasher flick? An 80s nostalgia flick? Or was it a social satire?

Actually, it is a bit of all three, though primarily it is a very well-done bit of social satire, commenting on the excesses of the late 1980s by examining one man, Patrick Bateman, played with total yuppie abandon by the remarkable Christian Bale. Bateman is a Wall Street high-flyer, completely lacking in importance but rich enough to give the appearance of it. He is a consummate performer, an empty shell of a man clad in expensive Valentino suits and cared for with the finest products pour l'homme. He blithely admits that he lacks any sort of human emotion except greed and ambition, and this becomes fairly obvious almost immediately; his face is usually fixed in an empty perma-grin, and his voice is rather high-pitched, with that hollow sort of forced cheerfulness that self-help gurus and promoters on late-night infomercials have.

This is entirely suitable for Bateman; he is the consummate consumer, far more interested in spending time with his daily personal care routine than in developing any real human relationships. He describes this skin-care and exercise regimen in a lengthy monologue, in fact, near the opening of the film. It is one of the film's most entertaining moments: its unabashed, preening vanity is hysterical, and the sequence is not hurt any by frequent displays of Bale's extremely well-cut physique. Bale uses his physicality as part of his roles, and always has: here he has the well-defined, bulked-up body of a Greek god and clearly spends most of his free time exercising to the point of obsession. This enhances the image of Bateman as a total narcissist, and plays along very well with the 80s obsession with exercise and weight.

When he is not discussing himself, Bateman talks mainly about music and pop culture. He delivers paeans to the corporate gods of the music industry: Phil Collins, Whitney Houston, Huey Lewis and the News, MOR - anyone whose work justifies the solipsistic lifestyle he leads - but what he says is often so self-contradictory we wonder if he's actually thought about any of it, or learned it wholesale from the album covers and magazines. His monologuing is usually amusing, but we learn fairly quickly that it is not a good sign; people have a tendency to die when Bateman starts talking about music. In fact, people have a tendency to die when they're around Bateman in general, and this only increases in frequency as the movie progresses.

There are many murders in this film, but the viewer is gratefully spared seeing any of them in any sort of detail. The book goes into grisly, delighted in an almost Julia Child-ish way, detail about the killings; here director Mary Harron has the good sense to keep much of the gore off-screen. It was not, in fact, for violence and gore that the film originally got an NC-17 rating, but for a rather risque three-way sex scene. Five or six seconds cut from the theatrical release got it an R-rating instead.The film definitely deserves its R-rating, but the violence and the sex are done in such a way that they are not mean or vicious towards the victims, only towards Bateman, who is never made to look anything but a total idiot. These scenes are really more humourous than revolting, though that sounds callous to those who haven't seen the film. Bateman is such a priss, such a total narcissist, that it is impossible to admire or sympathize with him.

Christian Bale is a complete marvel in this role. I have been a fan since his heart-wrenching performance ages ago in "Empire of the Sun," though here he has clearly grown up and could not be more different. It speaks well for his versatility that he could go from the youthfully innocent Demetrius in "A Midsummer Night's Dream" the year before, to the utterly indifferent Patrick Bateman here, to the stoic and thoroughly decent Mandras in "Captain Corelli's Mandolin" the year after. This may be because Bale seems to lack any shred of self-preservation, completely giving himself over to his characters.

Here, he completely inhabits Bateman whilst simultaneously making him a 24-hour performer himself. There is nothing to Patrick Bateman: he is all posture and gesture, "sound and fury signifying nothing," and Bale nails this in a dead-on performance that is far more nuanced than is often acknowledged. This is a role that could easily make an actor look ridiculous, even repulsive, yet Bale manages by throwing caution to wind to make him, if not believable, acceptable in his own peculiar fashion. It takes a very distinct courage to run down a corridor, blood-spattered and wearing nothing but tennis-shoes, bearing a mirror-polished gleaming chainsaw and screaming at the top of one's lungs. Bale has it, and manages to be so ludicrous and off-the-wall in this scene that I had time to notice that he wasn't wearing socks in his shoes, and could be more offended by this than the thought of the chainsaw. This sort of response is essential to the proper understanding and enjoyment of this movie.

The film is strongest as a commentary and exposition of the 1980s yuppie quest for world domination, though some may complain Harron is a one-note director and hammers her point home a little too well. The 80s were a decade of total narcissism, when it was "hip to be square," greed was good, and one's social importance was determined largely by what restaurants one could get into on a Friday night. (This is, in fact, the inspiration for one of Bateman's murderous rages.) By carrying these themes into the exaggerated, hyper-macho world of corporate takeovers, Harron is able to more fully explore them. Here, Bateman's murders become the logical if radical extensions of Wall Street's corporate aggressiveness, and "mergers and acquisitions" are not so far removed from "murders and executions," and his utter indifference to anyone but himself is the reasonable end of the dehumanizing of the corporate machine.

 

[Mr.Webs]

I love that film. Being a huge Phan of the musical, novel, and movie incarnations, this was awesome.

My only true complaint is Gerard Butler's voice, which was horrid in comparison to anyone who's every portrayed the Phantom in the play. He did not have the range for the role. I understand that Shumacher was going for a "rock and roll" kind of voice, but it did not work well. Frankly, I don't see how anyone could be entranced by his voice. He also missed some of the most important notes in the musical.

Also, some lines were spoken instead of sung, which was lame.

Other than that, spectacular. The changes from stage to screen were perfectly fine, for the most part. It's a beautiful film.

8/10.

Ah, I disaggre. I believe that Butler's voice fit the Phantom well...I've always thought of his voice as a baritone, unlike Michael Crawford's. Don't get me wrong, Crawford's voice is brilliant, but, his sounds like a terribly sad Phantom, while Butler's voice captures the anger.

But, you're right about the spoken lyrics. I hate that.

 

[The Shape]

Ah, I disaggre. I believe that Butler's voice fit the Phantom well...I've always thought of his voice as a baritone, unlike Michael Crawford's. Don't get me wrong, Crawford's voice is brilliant, but, his sounds like a terribly sad Phantom, while Butler's voice captures the anger.

But, you're right about the spoken lyrics. I hate that.

But see, the idea in the play is that this horrific monster can have this beautiful voice that entrances Christine.An it's all about the sadness, more so than the anger. Butler and maybe one or Phantoms from the play are the only baritones to ever play the role. I didn't mind that he was a baritone so much. It was just that he sung very poorly in many parts.

While I too love Crawford's voice, the best Phantom on Broadway was Howard Mcgillan (sp?), who played the role recently for the record breaking performance. I saw him twice, and his vocal range was absolutely amazing. He could sing so softly and beautifully like Crawford, but could quickly becoming angry and booming like Butler. I would've loved to see someone like him in the movie, with an actual singing background. His performance brought tears to my eyes both times, at two different points in each performance.