Directed By: Amos Poe Written By: Amos Poe & Gregory K. Heller Story By: Gregory K. Heller Cinematography: Oliver Wood Editor: Grahame Weinbran
Cast: Vincent Spano, Kate Vernon, Michael Winslow, Jami Gertz, Clifton Powell, Ray Serra, Daniel Jordano, Zohra Lempert, Tom Mardirosian, Tom Wright
A New York City drug dealer decides to get out of the business, but has to flee from mobsters.
It took a while for me to watch this film. As the DVD and video cover made it look like some revenge movie from a third-world country all bathed in brown and gold.
Once I finally saw a trailer for the film it intrigued my interests.
One of the odd times that actor Vincent Spano played a leading role. Usually whenever he does the film almost comes off as an oddity, a memorable film, and performance.
This film is stylish and goes for a kind of gritty neon-noir look that takes place all in one night, but it comes off more shiny than deep. As it plays almost like a MIAMI VICE episode style only in New York. Even though it came out before that show. So maybe it influenced that show.
As it is episodic, the character is working on a kind of countdown that seems to have started as more of a regular night. As it seems he is given a job to do in one night that would help set him up in the mob higher. Yes, he is more than just some street dealer. He has aspirations and a family.
It seems episodic as most characters he seems to only deal with on one or two scenes and then never heard from Or at least seen again except for when it is convenient. The ones we Do keep seeing are his adversaries and his best friend/top dealer/drug addict played by Michael Winslow in a strange off-kilter nihilistic dramatic Performance. Which strangely comes off reminding one of Chris Tucker in tone.
The film keeps your interest up. Even if it is more a fascinating look at early 1980’s New York before it got cleaned up. So that it works as a kind of nostalgic time capsule of the city mainly in the neighborhood of the title.
There are of course its fair share of ridiculous scenes like how Long it takes him to realize he is being set up by one of his clients. How his girlfriend refuses to leave. When he explains why they have to leave town even though she understands why he does. She expects his gangster bosses to spare her and their child.
Though there is some action it’s not awe-inspiring even though in one scene you can see the director John Singleton used it in 2 FAST 2 FURIOUS. Though in that movie it Was used as an impressive sequence of seduction and cool. Here it is more used as a means of intimidation and cool.
Proving that this film is more influential than anyone expected and seems to be a well-Kept secret.
By now if you have watched enough films the story Will be predictable with a happier ending than you Would normally expect. That is an act that makes no sense but works for the end.
The film comes off as a nice attempt to make something a little more artistic even with a familiar storyline at the time. It comes off as hip more than anything.
Written & Directed By: Joel Coen & Ethan Coen Cinematography By: Roger Deakins Editor: Joel Coen & Ethan Coen (As Roderick Jaynes)
Cast: Tom Hanks, Irma P. Hall, Marlon Wayans, J.K. Simmons, Tzi Ma, Ryan Hurst, Diane Delano, Jason Weaver, Stephen Root, Greg Grunberg A remake of the 1955 comedy, the story revolves around a Southern professor who puts together a group of thieves to rob a casino. They rent a room in an old woman’s house, but soon she discovers the plot and they must kill her, a task that is more difficult than it seems.
This is the first Coen brothers film where Joel Coen and Ethan Coen are both given directing and producing credits. They have shared these duties on all of their films, but Joel has always been listed as the director and Ethan as producer.
A goofy cartoon of a movie that seems like the actors all came to try and do ridiculous characters and accents but soon the fun and craziness become infective and you find yourself transfixed joining in on the fun. The film has certain dark humor that is also goofy and deadpan.
Though Tom Hanks is top-billed and certainly makes an impression. As it is the first time it seems to be him having fun with a role in a long time. Since it is rare he gets not only a challenge playing a part, but such an off-wall character seems to be liberating for him, but the true star of the film is Irma P. Hall.
One can see why the Coen Brothers choose to remake this. It’s certainly a Hollywood film for them with a big star, but they also subvert the film to their type of humor and have the film be inhabited by the type of characters who are common in their type of films. It was made during what I like to call their Hollywood years.
After the success of O, BROTHER WHERE ART THOU they seemed to be making fluff with big stars which may have been a strategic plan. So in the future, if they wanted to make more personal films they could get better budgets or at least enough financing based on their record of hopefully hit studio films. At least this film lets them further explore the southern culture and satirize it with a bit of nostalgic heart. Like their hit O, BROTHER WHERE ART THOU
The film reminds the audience how successful that film was and explores similar territory not as philosophical or deep. There is enough room for stylistic choices. If there is one thing that is right above this film it’s the rich atmosphere and warm colors that fill the screen. Like a southern gothic tapestry. You could almost taste the scenes. The Film involves plenty of Memorable characters that you hate to see go. Each could have been a start of there own movie or adventure.
As always with the Coens the film has a great soundtrack, Full of southern charm with gospel hits, Bluegrass, and hip hop.
Prior to filming, Tom Hanks had not seen The Ladykillers as he did not want it to prejudice the way he acted in the remake.
I almost like to think of the Hollywood movies they make as experimental at least for them. With an original idea but in the mode of old Hollywood classic films. The filmmakers are at home with the wild and wacky.
Whereas studio films they have the technicality down pat but when it comes to the more mundane slightly less outrageous aspects to story and character they can do it easily but you can see it makes them uneasy. It shows they are trying to do something completely foreign to them thus experimental
A revolver-wielding stranger crosses paths with two warring clans who are both on the hunt for a hidden treasure in a remote western town. Knowing his services are valuable to either side, he offers himself to the clan who will offer up the largest share of the wealth.
This film is more an experimental feature than an actual film to me. It seems more interested in paying homage and trying something different than being a worthwhile feature.
It’s not surprising Quentin Tarantino produced this, a film which gives him two actual acting roles to play, from the first scene it alerts you to the type of film it will be, with it’s obviously fake sets ad backgrounds, over the top action, and a ridiculous amount of blood splatter.
Director Takashi Miike’s films he never been boring, this is no exception. He is not a Director, but more a visual artist. Who seems more interested in telling a story visually and pulling off beautiful one-of-a-kind shots. Then he is sometimes with plot or acting it seems actors are mere props to help him realize his vision. That can sometimes hurt his features as the acting can range only from ok to horrible. Never excellent, great, or good. But it does rank him in the auteur status. The man works quick and is known to complete up to 3 – 4 features a year.
He has a huge library behind him. Not all of the winners though definitely original in content with mixed results.
Here he makes a western though I’m not sure if it’s set in America or Japan. As when the stranger rides into town. It is supposedly Nevada it’s an all-Asian cast where all the actors speak English, non-dubbed since it is not their first language the acting is not that good though they Try. Which leaves the film to feel artificial. Everything feels like a nice try, but with no reason why. It does have a few shots that are nice touches to remind us o spaghetti westerns. I guess this is partially filmed foreigner but made to look American with Tarantino as a cameo of an American star.
The introduction to the tale given by Quentin Tarantino’s character is taken almost verbatim from the opening passage of the Tale of Heike: “The sound of the Gion Shouja bells echoes the impermanence of all things; the color of the sala flowers reveals the truth that the prosperous must decline. The proud do not endure, they are like a dream on a spring night; the mighty fall at last, they are as dust before the wind.” (Helen Craig McCullough’s translation) When the sheriff is talking to old Quentin Tarantino’s character the sheriff talks about Akira (his son) and Tarantino replies “every time I hear that name it touches my heart, what can I say, I’ve always been an anime otaku”, (Japanese slang for a person that is a fan of anime, manga, and Japanese video games and culture) this is a reference to the classic anime film “Akira”.
Quentin Tarantino’s mechanical wheelchair has a duck hood ornament on one of the arms, the same hood ornament as on Stuntman Mike’s car in Death Proof, directed by Tarantino.
While the images are somewhat homages, the shots and style are totally original. Miike, who I wonder with so much output does he ever feel these films are personal and special to him or is it just a job and once the project is done, he forgets it and while it is in production he is focused on finishing it by any means necessary as quickly as possible.
This film involves a certain fantasy element of unbelievable circumstances in addition to guns the main character also uses a samurai sword as a gun. A sort of reminder of the culture the characters originated from.
One of the extravagances is having a character have an all of a sudden split personality that comes out of nowhere that controls him physically at times, which leads to plenty of physical comedy, but makes no sense especially when it raises him from the dead.
The action finale is a bit of a letdown. I expected more of a spectacle than what I got. Thinking most of the film was a lead-up to an action extravaganza ends.
Quentin Tarantino proves yet again that he is not the most gifted actor.
If you don’t look for too much, you should like the film.
A satisfying rental but not a must-see. Expand your horizons give it a chance.
Directed By: Navot Papushado Written By: Navot Papushado & Ehud Lavski Cinematography: Michael Seresin Editor: Nicolas De Toth
Cast: Karen Gillian, Lena Headey, Paul Giamatti, Angela Bassett, Michelle Yeoh, Carla Gugino, Chloe Coleman, Ralph Ineson, Michael Smiley, Adam Negaitis
Three generations of women fight back against those who could take everything from them.
The film Plays like pop art to please the masses full Of neon coloring. As it takes a bunch of action film narratives and tries to splice them All together with some nods to film noir.
It strangely comes off kind of dull but very colorful. As we watch, trying to figure out what movie caused this scene’s inspiration.
The action sequences are inspired and what the film depends on. As well as its Tarantino-inspired dialogue and quirkiness.
The film also like JOHN WICK tries to world build, unfortunately, it barely gives us a chance to know the characters or what is going on before a heavy emphasis on this. Which can lead to confusion early on.
Even if it more feels like HOTEL ARTEMIS with Its Rogue galleries of criminals, organizations, killers, doctors, clinics, and dealers. Though again John wick-ish with this network of criminals and yet also POINT BLANK with its organization that rules most of the underworld business.
Just as the DRIVE inspired jacket she wears throughout
While giving a more female-oriented point of view of the action in these types of films with a recognizable cast. Visually the film has all that it takes and is truly a style over substance but with an increasing degree when it comes to Netflix films it seems rather contained than open. Even as it works well with what it has.
As the story is far from simple for this type of film as the action seems to follow and seems to only. Be confusing because it needs a reason to have an action sequence.
The problem is that with all of this it still comes off limp and surprisingly a little dull. It’s like a meal that has food coloring nice to look at but ultimately something you have had before and are used to.
As even the score tries to use Sergio Leone-inspired music or random pop hits more to fit the action sequences than anything. Not necessarily adding anything to the emotional more like the director just thought it would be nice if this song played during this sequence. No real new meaning except for some irony.
Just as Karen Gillian is fine in the lead but is left with nothing to make her stand out. She comes off as having the skills but is pretty bland and one-note. She, unfortunately, stand out the least amongst the cast.
The only spark of originality other than color scheme comes for. The library and librarians were played by Michelle Yeoh, Angela Bassett, and Carla Gugino. They are a nice breath of fresh air. Where the most impressive action sequence takes place. Also, the clinic is A cute sequence as well as the diner.
Also the organization’s three henchmen they send to take her out up a challenge but seem pretty bad to be exclusive assassins. They come across as more muscle or thugs that would be back up or the type assassins have to do clean up Or dirty work for or Vice versa. Like a wrecking crew destroying and making a mess. so that there is no evidence
The villains offer no personality, only a stereotypical look of either Eastern European stereotypes or well-suited goons and backup men.
It’s also a film that feels like it’s trying too hard. It wants to stand out from the rest which is understandable, but by trying too hard to be like the others or those that came before it Lacks its own individual personality and feels like a loser, and ultimately Proves to be about nothing
It’s obviously a movie for a more mainstream audience looking. For an action escape and it works on that level but doesn’t offer anything new or original mist some nice dressing. As it definitely is more commercial and slick but offers nothing of depth. Like a best seller with no actual good writing just a story to work off of And try to live up to fill in the blanks
Written & Directed: Emerald Fennell Cinematography: Benjamin Kracun Editor: Frederic Thoraval
Cast: Carey Mulligan, Bo Burnham, Adam Brody, Sam Richardson, Clancy Brown, Jennifer Coolidge, Laverene Cox, Max Greenfield, Christopher Mintz-Plasse, Alison Brie, Connie Britton, Molly Shannon, Loren Paul, Christopher Lowell, Steve Monroe
A young woman, traumatized by a tragic event in her past, seeks out vengeance against those who crossed her path.
The film seeks to try to make its points over and over again that feel like overkill and preaching to a certain extent.
The film manages to surprise the audience using exploitation expectations though giving something else entirely.
This film would have worked fine enough if it was what one was expecting a revenge tale against so-called nice guys and bad guys alike.
Though the film addresses more and it tries to be a film that inspires discussion and becomes more of a think piece than necessarily Just a film. This is fine as long as it offers more arguments and evidence for what it seems to want to spark conversations.
Some aspects are left vague as we never really See what happens once she is down with her encounters with these men and are never really told what happens after. Is it just confrontation as a kind of exposing and warning to them? Does she do anything violent to them and if the just warning does she really Get revenge and does she have a backup security measure if these guys decide to get violent?
Even with her little notebook which she seems to make markings in of another case or victim. What Is it all for?
Not to mention afterwards though it seems to happen around the same town and area. It never comes back to her until the film needs it to, which comes off as a bit too convenient.
The film offers interesting twists but while there is a certain level of guilt. We still might wonder why she takes on this mission.
Her revenge schemes are thought out, cruel, and make their points. Even though most men are made out to be villains throughout there are some women who are just as guilty in their ambivalence.
The film seems to make a point against nice guys being as bad or worse than predators. As they see themselves above it all and defend or support women. Though deep down they hold the same attitudes as those predators and believe because of their other good deeds that they are somehow owed love or a woman. Even as these nice guys already seem kind of predatory or at least douchey beforehand.
Especially by casting actors, we have seen as the nice guy nerdish characters in other films and television shows. Who here makes cameos or has a scene or two Then disappear. That truly only one character actually does surprise me.
This also gives the film a whiff of superiority as it comes off more about issues than character. Which for some might feel for some
Preachy and while a film about the issues it presents are welcome. The film isn’t as good to back it up, Or be a good example.
Nice to see comedian Bo Burnham Giving more of a meaty supporting role.
This is a revenge tale that takes comfort in being in and having the rules but acts like it is better than them. When it actually might be a little smarter and more discreet in its handling And treatment of the Material.
Which helps the film not be as exploitative. As the character and scenes aren’t made erotic or sexualized. It comes off as more of a new normal get more through a feminine gaze. Though strangely in its set-up and backgrounds it feels almost like it’s taking place on a kind of dreamland as it is real but feels artificial, more pretty than anything.
The design of the film is remarkable and quite brightly colored to offset the dark behaviors and characters.
The film’s strength is more in its surprising and unpredictable third act.
This is also a movie that loses some points due to hype. As ever since hearing about the film before it Came out wanted to see it and heard nothing but good things to the point of it’s Multiple academy award nominations And win for best original screenplay. But not after finally seeing it. That hype hurt the film in my eyes.
Even when trying to put that aside others might have Been lucky to Discover it to admire it for what it is. (The best way To see any film) But coming into the film with preconceived thoughts. It doesn’t live up to the prose exactly. As it isn’t horrible but not as good as expected though better than average.
It feels like a lifetime movie due to the can be anywhere, Polished no violence but always a threat of it and actions mostly Done on theory with big histrionics and a cast more known for appearances on television.
The film even introduces an idea that might even work as a sequel
Directed By: Tanya Rosenberg Written By: Craig Clyde, James Hennessy & George Saunders Story By: Jim Makichuk Cinematography: Sam Gart Editor: Rick Mitchell
Cast: Gregory Scott Cummins, Laura Albert, Shelley Abblett, Luke Shay, Ross Hagen, Don Dowe, George Buck Flower, Julie Hall, Paula Manga, Sabrina Hills
A team of softball players get lost in the woods after their bus breaks down. They get attacked, beaten, raped and murdered by some psychotic men. The women fight back with baseball bats and bows and arrows.
This film is quite the throwback. As I believe i saw this back in the day on late-night HBO as a kid.
The film is simple and stupid yet entertaining. As it was released in 1990 but feels made from pure 1980’s ideas all the way.
As essentially it pits an innocent team of female softball players versus what seems like a whole county of evil redneck men bent on revenge. Even though the females are assaulted the perpetrator is killed by accident but he is seen as innocent and the ladies as bloodthirsty.
The film is made by a female filmmaker. So that it feels more sympathetic to the female character as heroes and survivors. Even though they have short-cut tight semi revealing outfits. They are rarely nude and the sex that the film shows is violent and involves rape. So that while it heaps on the violence. It stays not explosive when it comes to sex and nudity. Giving the female characters a sense of pride. It treats them more as human beings and less as sex objects. They are treated more respectful
Even when it comes to the deaths of characters. When it’s a male you feel a kind of happiness. More like they deserved it. Whereas when it is a female character it is tragic and makes you in the audience want to get emotional.
The villains come off at times as more comedic releif than at least two of the characters do. Who manages to survive despite being thought of, or left for dead in many accidents throughout. Though early on they are more comedic releif until the hunt begins. Where they are rarely scary just armed doofuses and then only own becomes a threat later in the film. Even though most of the male characters believe themselves to be badass. That only appears to be true in numbers.
Titillation was used to their advantage constantly though more accidentally and as a survival technique.
The film stands as a kind Of statement in a genre that usually leaves female characters as the damsels in distress who can’t help themselves, wives & girlfriends meant to be by someone’s side but barely have anything to do or as sex objects. This film sets the female characters apart from that not necessarily in a better quality of filmmaking.
The one Minority character gets killed off early and quickly.
The initial premise that sets this film up is ridiculous. Why would the females team coach/manager trust the town’s matriarch in a fair game? Also is the female team professional traveling along to take on exhibition games and pick-up games? Are they hustling unsuspecting towns and teams which should be tipped off by their team bus and matching uniforms? Are they using sexism to help them be underestimated and hoping that by showing their talent that men will see them in a different way and then be respectful? That seems like the premise for another film. As this film seems to want to set up and get to the action quickly.
The film is barely 90 minutes. Though while it doesn’t feel longer than Its running time. It could have been easily 10 minutes shorter
This film is ultimately meant to be a tale of survival.
Directed By: Nicolas Lopez Written By: Nicolas Lopez, Eli Roth & Guillermo Amodeo Cinematography By: Antonio Quercia Editor: Diego Macho Gomez Cast: Eli Roth, Andrea Osvart, Ariel Levy, Natasha Yarovenko, Lorenza Izzo, Nicolas Martinez
After an earthquake erupts in Chile, tourists discover that a neighboring prison in the area collapsed in the event, and all surviving criminals managed to break free. Soon they learn that the most terrifying thing, more threatening than Mother Nature, is what she created.
The film was originally rated NC-17 but had to be cut and re-edited in order to get an R Rating.
Now, this film could have easily gone the wrong way and been schlocky. The longer the film plays and you watch the more impressive it becomes as it truly shows you the terror and danger of the various situations, while setting up a time limit as an impending doom worse than anything they encounter physically and personally might becoming.
The film feels at times to just be punishing its characters just to do it. While it’s no torture porn. It’s quite cruel but maintains a certain reality while also following certain genre rules and tropes.
No one comes out of the film clean. They all end up becoming victims in some way, shape, or form.
The first act sets up the characters as we get to know them and see them enjoying their vacation setting up group dynamics, Relationships, and friendships. It works as act 2 and 3 then unspools and we feel more of a connection to the characters. We find ourselves caring about their fates. It feels like a continuation of co-writer, co-producer, co-star Eli Roth’s other horror films. Where a trip to a foreign locale, We see the fun and pursuit of sex that often backfires and leans towards comedic. Then all of a sudden moves into horror pretty quickly. Here it feels like a more mature version of it. I have to give both credits. I feel he is growing his talent more and this helps represent a newfound maturity. It shows.
None of the leads is completely evil or completely good. They do what they have to do to survive.
The film does reek of a B-Movie aesthetic at times. Mainly due to the disaster aspects.
There are no sacred cows as the film sets itself up pretty early, That anyone can be taken out and killed. This helps throw the audience off as you never are quite sure how far it will go nor what can and can’t happen. Just general randomness Through many challenges no one great villain just has to survive. No stalking monster though the tsunami warnings give the characters incentive to rush the experience and keep moving while working against the calamities.
The film shows what can be scarier than a natural disaster is the citizen’s reactions.
Of course, the casting of Eli Roth in the lead and him being a producer and co-writer. He will be accused of having this film be just another extension of his ego or just another project for him to star in. A vanity project almost as he has cameoed in his films and in others. Though the film doesn’t leave him in a heroic light. He does fine with the material
What sometimes disturbs me in films is that whenever it is more of a minority culture. When things break down. They are always shown as looters, Gangs, and rapists. Whereas Caucasians are usually the heroes or the victims. Rarely do we see them along as the ones going crazy and being just as bad unless it’s post-apocalyptic. Where they are the organized villains, part of a hierarchy. Here it happens in a foreign locale and directed and co-written by a native of Chile where it is filmed
Nicolas Lopez who I am a fan of ever since seeing the preview of the film PROMEDIO ROJO. 9 years ago and then finally seeing it last year. He has a vision and while the film includes a scene of the thing I hate most in films (Rape) it’s not as graphic as it could have been or still disturbing.
This is a bleak downtrodden tale that I have to say I found exceptional than what I thought it would be or easily could have become, truthfully the preview made this film look like a SyFy original film. Thankfully it’s much better.
It’s a movie to seek out more if you are a genre fan.
Directed By: Jose Padilha Written By: Joshua Zetumer Based On The Original 1987 Screenplay By: Edward Neumeier & Michael Miner Cinematography By: Lula Carvalho Editor: Peter McNulty & Daniel Rezende
Cast: Joel Kinnaman, Gary Oldman, Michael Keaton, Michael K. Williams, Jay Baruchel, Jackie Earle Haley, Samuel L. Jackson, Jennifer Ehle, Marianne Jean-Baptiste, Aimee Garcia In RoboCop, the year is 2028 and multinational conglomerate OmniCorp is at the center of robot technology. Overseas, their drones have been used by the military for years – and it’s meant billions for OmniCorp’s bottom line. Now OmniCorp wants to bring their controversial technology to the home front, and they see a golden opportunity to do it. When Alex Murphy – a loving husband, father and good cop doing his best to stem the tide of crime and corruption in Detroit – is critically injured in the line of duty, OmniCorp sees their chance for a part-man, part-robot police officer. OmniCorp envisions a RoboCop in every city and even more billions for their shareholders, but they never counted on one thing: there is still a man inside the machine pursuing justice.
Though a sanitized version of the original. This film retains some of the original aspects of the film. While managing to care about its own identity that is somewhat noteworthy and is better at being a reboot than something like TOTAL RECALL which tried too hard to be a virtual remake with all the greatest hits they try to change it around.
The film tries to be somewhat satirical with a lot less bite. It is strangely more on point and cynical though takes the time to explain as feels more Of the time whereas the original always felt futuristic.
The film allows the director Jose Padilha (ELITE SQUAD) to keep his hand-held style of filming and guerrilla, you are their filmmaking skills.
The original ROBOCOP was more memorable as it looked accomplished for a film with such a low budget. In this film, you see the big-budget onscreen. No one essentially embarrasses themselves. The film just feels basic by the end. Nothing really to give it an identity or make it memorable. Especially when it already has so many naysayers against It just for being made as the film is still relevant and remembered. At least this film tries to be an honest reboot.
The changes really hammer home some points. The revealing scene of what is left of him is really a gripping scene aided by impressive special effects.
The film is more excessive in price and scope than the original which was more excessive In Behavior, violence, and action. Now of course the studio wants the film to appeal to broader demographics. So it is softened torn a hard R to a pg-13 rating aim end more at a younger audience. Director Jose Padilha and actor Joel Kinnaman fought hard for an R rating, but due to the ever-expanding budget, which went from a modest $60 million budget and ballooned to a $120 million budget, studio executives were forced to deliver a PG-13 rating in hopes to recoup the budget they had spent on the film. Throughout the course of filming, studio executives kept a close eye on Padilha, making sure he was going to deliver a PG-13 rating. At least this film comes off as more questioning the ethics of the situation. Which is either modern-day or futures
This version of ROBOCOP feels more like a comic book version that would have been understandable for popularity amongst kids in the 80’s. Whereas the original first two films from the ’80s were seen by a generation who were probably too young to see the film and despite its rating still managed to become an iconic hero mostly to kids. While being so jetted I gross violence on screen. Featuring drugs and having a more graphic satirical cynical nature.
I love the original I was one of those who saw the film way too young and loved it. Though didn’t understand it 100%, not the ramifications of what I was exactly seeing. Nick Schenk and James Vanderbilt are among the few uncredited writers who have entirely rewritten Joshua Zetumer’s screenplay.
The satire tries for reaching reactions but brings up a subject we already know to showcase. Though his is all comparative and goes against the film leaving its own identity barren as it is always being compared to its original or a similar film. Like MEMENTO and THE SALTON SEA have similar storylines through different points, direction and showcases its own story and plot in different ways
The film feels more like a video game at times but is kept realistically vivid.
It’s nice when a film manages to surprise you and is much better in quality than it was suspected and I can admit when I was wrong on the first impression. Someone’s the same can be said about people…even me.
Like MINORITY REPORT it is part of the idea that this new technology is good for keeping statistics down a bit at what cost.
Watching ROBOCOP remade and marketed as a machine feels a bit like behind the scenes of how maybe the film was made itself very meta.
I found it interesting how he is seen as a club or in the original design. Though once the new design comes into play the film moves up and a new identity takes off. That the film begins to suffer. The action scenes aren’t anything special and feel basic. Losing the part of the personality a measurement the audience came specifically to see.
I can see why the well-regarded cast chooses to be in the film. Especially Michael Keaton who makes an interesting return to form.
Jackie Earl Haley hilarious in his role wish there was more of him in the film. Other than a small role and a return towards the end.
Gary Oldman has his own Doctor Frankenstein type role starts off the film innocent, but finds himself falling in line with his employers as they give him more than he can ever want and interested to see how his invention plays out and reacts. Which also informs the audience. Though it is nice to see the original film batman in scenes with the reboots Commissioner Jim Gordon
Samuel l. Jackson’s role in this film feels like a more well spoken. J. Jonah Jameson from SPIDER-MAN for this franchise.
Interesting angle as we watch Alex Murphy not only deal with his new life change but also as he pieces together his own murder. Doesn’t seem to be as grand a plan as more random.
There is also a revenge plot that is dropped then brought up and then passes to the side as simple. For bigger machinations. Though leaves no closure as to the details.
Then there is a character change that you kind of know is coming. Though still feels strange once it happens, Once the villain is revealed. A villain more of morals I guess more than actual acts, but supervised to a degree and gave the go-ahead. It gets a little false and generalized not the individual but more what he represents and his ideas.
It tries to impart thy everyone has a price, only those who are truly brave and honest don’t
While they were successful in the making of the film and can understand why the project was greenlit. It would have been great if the film just wasn’t ROBOCOP. And was just an action film under a new name and characters. Redesigning the suit to be more updated and flexible doesn’t help. Though that point is handled well in the film as both an homage and representation. After having his time goes back to the original model. The same we in the audience have known.
I can admit I wondered I they made a sequel where would it head.
Directed By: Sang-Ho Yeon Written by: Sang-Ho Yeon & Ryu Yong-Jae Cinematography: Hyung-Deok Lee Editor: Jinmo Yang
Cast: Dong-Won Gang, Lee Jung-Hyun, Re Lee, Hae-Hyo Keon, Min-Jae Kim, Kyo-Hawn Koo, Do-Yoo Kim
Peninsula takes place four years after the zombie outbreak in Train to Busan. The Korean peninsula is devastated and Jung Seok, a former soldier who has managed to escape overseas, is given a mission to go back and unexpectedly meets survivors.
The film builds the world that was set up in TRAIN TO BUSAN and while the film is inventive and Starts off with a bang from The beginning at the start to define the antagonist and place a proper history for him.
Then the film Gets going with action pretty quick as well as the plot. The opening scene flashes to the all-new cast of characters and fleshes them out.
It works more as an action film with horror elements. Where most of the true horror is how the human characters treat each other in times of strife for survival.
At times the use of CGI zombies is obvious but used to make their threat grander and more epic but luckily not cheesy.
The film is post-apocalyptic where gangs of survivors run the streets and find others stragglers for sadistic games.
We are introduced to a human villain they are killing a character just to do it. No actual gain
The film’s finale has a car chase that reminds the audience of THE ROAD WARRIOR. While the film feels like it was inspired by ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK. With a planned heist that goes wrong, he becomes a man on a mission and rescue mission. So the film obviously wears it’s inspirations on its sleeves while trying to add its own flavor.
Wisely the film trims the fat early. As this film is more political, adventurous, it opens up the world. Like most sequels, this film is bigger and feels less emotional as a thing of the past.
In the end the film’s themes seem to be about family and the sacrifices you are willing to make for them.
Directed By: Michael Matthews Written By: Brian Duffield & Matthew Robinson Story by: Brian Duffield Cinematography: Lachlan Milne Editor: Debbie Berman & Nancy Richardson
Cast: Dylan O’Brien, Jessica Henwick, Michael Rooker, Ariana Greenblatt, Dan Ewing, Ellen Hellman, Tre Hale, Amali Golden, Pacharo Mzembe, Senie Priti
Seven years after the Monsterpocalypse, Joel Dawson, along with the rest of humanity, has been living underground ever since giant creatures took control of the land. After reconnecting over the radio with his high school girlfriend Aimee. who is now 80 miles away at a coastal colony, Joel begins to fall for her again. As Joel realizes that there’s nothing left for him underground, he decides against all logic to venture out to Aimee, despite all the dangerous monsters that stand in his way.
For a movie that is so brutal and that can feel cruel at times. This film Is surprisingly heartwarming.
Our protagonist is willing to face his greatest fear to try and find and believe with the girl he loves and while on his way picking up things and being taught how to survive and not be afraid.
Whereas by the end the message is to be brave enough to live life and explore and to not be scared and hide at home. Right message, wrong time for the film but maybe a refreshing message eventually for the world.
This film has the world having gone through a post-apocalyptic event and art fighting off natural elements that have been mutated. So that humans are more the rodents to be lived off of.
One of the refreshing things about the movie is that you probably know what is going to happen. Is the twists the films offer to throw you off or give you a different perception rather than the traditional endings and circumstances.
By the end, the most refreshing thing about this film is that it chooses not to wallow in more the cutthroat everybody for themselves and cynical world view and instead chooses to try to diva on the positive more communal and everyone helping one another in despair.
Though at times it might remind some audience members of the cult film and book A BOY AND HIS DOG. This film isn’t as satirical or cold-hearted as that story was.
The characters who are the most endearing are the guides and survivors played by Michael Rooker and Ariana Greenblatt. Who serve as saviors, warriors, comic relief, and a kind of family for the main character when he is on his own at first. It’s also nice to see Rooker play more of a good guy for once
So it’s nice to see a film Of this genre that isn’t so nihilistic and careless when it comes to the characters. It feels more like a breath of fresh air. While clearly being aimed more at teenagers.
Again screenwriter Brian Duffield does it again. Managing to take a genre movie and make it so much more or filling it with characters we believe in and can identify with making the story that much more engaging for the audience. Even if usually more through teenage characters
Cut To The Chase 