So I checked out the Crank 2 red band trailer....after the long (for a trailer) montage of swearing....what we get is more of the same crazy shite that was seen in the original movie. However the two directors have decided to go even more over the top than before and it doesn't look too bad. I did have my doubts about the second film after how the first film ended (quite a perfect closed ending to be honest).
The link for the trailer is here.
So while I took the first film far too seriously the first time I watched it, after a DVD rewatch I enjoyed it a lot more. The second film ups the stakes in bat shit insanity and I reckon I'll find this sequel will be far more enjoyable than some of the other larger budgeted follow ups released this year (I am talking about Transformers 2 here).
BUT! I just checked out the Crank 2 blog website and for some reason the filmmakers decided to place Geri Halliwell in the movie....So with this said Micheal Bay will probably win again in the hot woman in action film casting.
Byron: Not so much a film reviewer, more of a drunk who stumbles into cinemas and yells at the screen.
Sunday, 4 January 2009
Tuesday, 30 December 2008
Review of the year: 2008
Well 2008 is almost over and 2009 is gearing itself up to be a quite a good movie year. Hopefully I will locate more cash and go to the movies more often than I did in 2008. However with the credit crunch (read: cute word for recession) rearing it's ugly head, this seems unlikely!
However with it all said and done I still managed to check out enough movies to have a top five list of films and that's all that matters. I also have a bottom 3 list of movies that I found unbelievably dreadful. Why only three? Because films that sucked hard should not have an equal amount of reading time as films I actually enjoyed.
Also, none of the films on either list are in any sort of order as I don't see the point.
So without further ado:
BYRON'S FAVE FIVE FILMS OF THE YEAR (2008 UK CINEMA RELEASE)
A meditation of fate and a truly quality Neo-western
Cloverfield:
The Monster movie re-vamped with a sprinkling of Blair Witch for the youtube generation.

There Will Be Blood:
PTA's most mature offering to date with a power house performance by Daniel Day Lewis
The Monster movie re-vamped with a sprinkling of Blair Witch for the youtube generation.

There Will Be Blood:
PTA's most mature offering to date with a power house performance by Daniel Day Lewis

The Dark Knight:
There's no introduction needed. You knew this would show up somewhere.

Juno:
A sweet and simple coming of age film, which suddenly became a figure of hate for being successful.
THE WORST FILMS I WATCHED THIS YEAR (UK CINEMA RELEASE 2008):

Jumper:
The usually reliable Doug Liman gives us; not only a bad movie but half a bad movie.

Awake:
Dreary Thriller with no surprises and Hayden Christensen AGAIN!

The Happening
Zooey and Mark running...from nothing....for 90 minutes...fucking tragic.
Zooey and Mark running...from nothing....for 90 minutes...fucking tragic.
Roll on next year!
Man doesn't get mad...he gets shooty
A small newspaper article caught my eye yesterday. I had a quick search on the internets and found an article covering more about it courtesy of Total Film. For those who are too lazy to read the hyperlink....Basically James Joseph Cialella Jr got so pissed off at a father and son talking during a screening of The Curious Case Of Benjamin Button*, he decided to pop a cap in the dads ass (well arm).
Now while we all hope the father recuperates and gets well soon....
WHO THE HELL HASN'T WISHED THEY CAN DO SOMETHING SIMILAR IN A CINEMA?!??!!?!?
Seriously. As a cinema goer and ex cinema worker, the chances of getting an usher (usually a skinny student*) to help you can be quite limited. To add to this some people take the absolute piss when at a cinema. Talking during the ads and trailers I get, but people constantly having a conversation during the film can effectively ruin other peoples viewing experience. The other people have paid too ya know!!!
While it sounds like I'm trying to justify going postal during a pubic cinema screenings, usually when you ask someone to be quiet during a film these days, the said party will ignore you, talk even louder or bemoan something about their rights.
People should not get shot when at a cinema (or anywhere to be honest) but on the flipside...if everyone had their gobs shut during a film because they weren't sure if the nutter beside them was packing...Well you'd have more people enjoying their visit to the cinema.
*You know how people get so worried about violence in movies..... Benjamin fucking Button!?!?!?!?
**Trust me most of the people who worked with me when i worked at a cinema...skinny students...me included.
Now while we all hope the father recuperates and gets well soon....
WHO THE HELL HASN'T WISHED THEY CAN DO SOMETHING SIMILAR IN A CINEMA?!??!!?!?
Seriously. As a cinema goer and ex cinema worker, the chances of getting an usher (usually a skinny student*) to help you can be quite limited. To add to this some people take the absolute piss when at a cinema. Talking during the ads and trailers I get, but people constantly having a conversation during the film can effectively ruin other peoples viewing experience. The other people have paid too ya know!!!
While it sounds like I'm trying to justify going postal during a pubic cinema screenings, usually when you ask someone to be quiet during a film these days, the said party will ignore you, talk even louder or bemoan something about their rights.
People should not get shot when at a cinema (or anywhere to be honest) but on the flipside...if everyone had their gobs shut during a film because they weren't sure if the nutter beside them was packing...Well you'd have more people enjoying their visit to the cinema.
*You know how people get so worried about violence in movies..... Benjamin fucking Button!?!?!?!?
**Trust me most of the people who worked with me when i worked at a cinema...skinny students...me included.
Sunday, 28 December 2008
Review: All the boys love Mandy Lane
Year: 2008 (U.K General Release)
Director: Jonathon Levine
Screenplay: Jacob Forman
Starring: Amber Heard, Whitney Able, Anson Mount, Michael Welch
Synopsis
Credits
Hot Girls? Check. Dickhead Jock blokes? Check. Gory Set Pieces? Check. All the usual pieces are in place. However Levine's 70's style slasher is far too dull to be anything more than below standard horror film.
Levine's film takes an ice age to get going, preferring to bore the viewer with deary drug taking scenes and typical teen bitching before getting to what most people have come to see the movie for. Those who stay awake during these exceedingly boring moments will soon notice that Mandy Lame has no atmosphere or tension to speak of. The film has a brilliant setting for a horror movie and fails to utilize it, with Levine hardly using the farmhouse house at all. Maybe it's just me but generic chase scenes in a field just don't cut it, especially after 70 mins of badly decided MTV editing and faux 70's film filters. Levine's film shows how derivative the horror film can be these days.
The screenplays dialogue is believable enough but is dragged down by the fact that you will hate every character bar one (Hint: it's not Mandy Lane ). For a film which eludes slasher films of old the least this movie could do is include likable characters like they did. So not only do most of these characters take forever to die, but you'll have to grin and bear these assholes until they finally bite the bullet (or you leave the room). The relatively intriguing premise is marred by a bland narrative with a twist that is so unsurprising that you'll be more angry than shocked.
I guess it's a shame to all the attractive stars of the movie...or not. No one really stands out a such and they spew so much bile anyway you wouldn't care less if a huge explosion landed on the farmhouse and vaporize the fuckers.
Mandy Lane is just another pretender to the to the slasher throne. Unfortunately Mandy Lane can't compare to the Laurie Strodes and Sidney Prescotts of the genre. Even cult creatures such as Angela Baker have nothing to worry about as Mandy Lane will soon be relegated to the bargain bucket leagues.
Director: Jonathon Levine
Screenplay: Jacob Forman
Starring: Amber Heard, Whitney Able, Anson Mount, Michael Welch
Synopsis
Credits
Hot Girls? Check. Dickhead Jock blokes? Check. Gory Set Pieces? Check. All the usual pieces are in place. However Levine's 70's style slasher is far too dull to be anything more than below standard horror film.
Levine's film takes an ice age to get going, preferring to bore the viewer with deary drug taking scenes and typical teen bitching before getting to what most people have come to see the movie for. Those who stay awake during these exceedingly boring moments will soon notice that Mandy Lame has no atmosphere or tension to speak of. The film has a brilliant setting for a horror movie and fails to utilize it, with Levine hardly using the farmhouse house at all. Maybe it's just me but generic chase scenes in a field just don't cut it, especially after 70 mins of badly decided MTV editing and faux 70's film filters. Levine's film shows how derivative the horror film can be these days.
The screenplays dialogue is believable enough but is dragged down by the fact that you will hate every character bar one (Hint: it's not Mandy Lane ). For a film which eludes slasher films of old the least this movie could do is include likable characters like they did. So not only do most of these characters take forever to die, but you'll have to grin and bear these assholes until they finally bite the bullet (or you leave the room). The relatively intriguing premise is marred by a bland narrative with a twist that is so unsurprising that you'll be more angry than shocked.
I guess it's a shame to all the attractive stars of the movie...or not. No one really stands out a such and they spew so much bile anyway you wouldn't care less if a huge explosion landed on the farmhouse and vaporize the fuckers.
Mandy Lane is just another pretender to the to the slasher throne. Unfortunately Mandy Lane can't compare to the Laurie Strodes and Sidney Prescotts of the genre. Even cult creatures such as Angela Baker have nothing to worry about as Mandy Lane will soon be relegated to the bargain bucket leagues.
Wednesday, 17 December 2008
Elm Street - on, Near Dark - off, Rob Zombie - Frustrating
This week has been a mixed bag of fruits for those who enjoy horror films.
The Nightmare on Elm Street remake is now been greenlighted, while the Near Dark remake is now almost definitely off. To add to this Rob Zombie is getting a sequel to his badly taken (but successful) Halloween remake.
I watched A nightmare on Elm Street the other day and while the film has dated in it's jump scares and effects, the film still works well as a horror film. Its sub-text and dream logic is still hard to beat within the realms of mainstream Horror. The problem is America has almost given up on the idea of an original horror idea and seem set on releasing every old film under the sun.
These films are being thrown out at great speed and with mixed (mostly poor) results. While a remixed Nightmare could be a great idea with spruced up effects and a modern touch. Most remakes seem to forget what made the original films so special in the first place. A great example of this is the U.S remake of The Ring. By spelling out plot moments and ruining one of the most effective set pieces in modern horror, the end result is a bloated and lackluster film.
Many Horror fans can see a New Nightmare being devoid of those primal fears that made the first film so memorable and being given a tepid slasher movie. The jump scares improved but the creepiness gone.
I'm quite happy the Near Dark idea is being scrapped after hearing Producer Brad Fullers comments. Likened to Twilight? Granted i haven't seen the film yet but from the previews, the only thing that connects the two films are vampires. Replacing Near Dark's Neo noir western feel with OC style angst does not float my boat.
This brings me on to Mr Zombie. One of the main reasons I avoided the Halloween remake is because of the 2002 statements made by the director before making the film. After making the film obtaining the poor reviews and the outrages (but making a large amount of cash to be fair). Zombie said he's not going to make a sequel to the film....guess what folks....that's right!
Annoyingly this is after making this statement
Many on the boards have stated that Zombie made an OK film and I feel his a competent director in his on right. But one of Zombie's bad original ideas (read Devils Rejects) appears more watchable than a money motivated sequel. I maybe wrong but Zombie came into the horror scene as a raw and hungry director with original ideas blended with old school pastiche. Why turn around make such derivative films?*
*While I know i haven't seen the Halloween remake as of yet, But seriously, giving Micheal Myers such an elaborate backstory makes him lose his appeal and effectiveness.
The Nightmare on Elm Street remake is now been greenlighted, while the Near Dark remake is now almost definitely off. To add to this Rob Zombie is getting a sequel to his badly taken (but successful) Halloween remake.
I watched A nightmare on Elm Street the other day and while the film has dated in it's jump scares and effects, the film still works well as a horror film. Its sub-text and dream logic is still hard to beat within the realms of mainstream Horror. The problem is America has almost given up on the idea of an original horror idea and seem set on releasing every old film under the sun.
These films are being thrown out at great speed and with mixed (mostly poor) results. While a remixed Nightmare could be a great idea with spruced up effects and a modern touch. Most remakes seem to forget what made the original films so special in the first place. A great example of this is the U.S remake of The Ring. By spelling out plot moments and ruining one of the most effective set pieces in modern horror, the end result is a bloated and lackluster film.
Many Horror fans can see a New Nightmare being devoid of those primal fears that made the first film so memorable and being given a tepid slasher movie. The jump scares improved but the creepiness gone.
I'm quite happy the Near Dark idea is being scrapped after hearing Producer Brad Fullers comments. Likened to Twilight? Granted i haven't seen the film yet but from the previews, the only thing that connects the two films are vampires. Replacing Near Dark's Neo noir western feel with OC style angst does not float my boat.
This brings me on to Mr Zombie. One of the main reasons I avoided the Halloween remake is because of the 2002 statements made by the director before making the film. After making the film obtaining the poor reviews and the outrages (but making a large amount of cash to be fair). Zombie said he's not going to make a sequel to the film....guess what folks....that's right!
Annoyingly this is after making this statement
Many on the boards have stated that Zombie made an OK film and I feel his a competent director in his on right. But one of Zombie's bad original ideas (read Devils Rejects) appears more watchable than a money motivated sequel. I maybe wrong but Zombie came into the horror scene as a raw and hungry director with original ideas blended with old school pastiche. Why turn around make such derivative films?*
*While I know i haven't seen the Halloween remake as of yet, But seriously, giving Micheal Myers such an elaborate backstory makes him lose his appeal and effectiveness.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)


