The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey (2012)

Predicted rating: 4 stars

Directed by Peter Jackson (Braindead, Bad Taste). Staring Martin Freeman (The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy), Sir Ian McKellen (X- Men) and Hugo Weaving (The Matrix, Captain America).

The first installment in a new trilogy is the prequel to the highly successful Lord of the Rings trilogy. The once mighty dwarven city of Erebor is destroyed by a dragon named Smaug, forcing the dwarves to flee. The film tells the story of Thorin, his band of dwarves, Bilbo Baggins and Gandalf in their quest to reclaim the city and return the pride back to the dwarven race.

*sniff *sniff, what's that smell. Oh, it's money, something Peter Jackson will be smelling a lot of when he is strolling all the way to the bank. Essentially all this film is, is a money grab. I am not saying that a Hobbit movie shouldn't have been made, it is a good idea. However I am going to put an emphasis on the A, A Hobbit movie, not three. It is highly likely, with the current cinematic environment, that these movies will go into make a billion plus dollars each. Peter Jackson knows this and all he is aiming to do is make three low risk films that will everyone will go see. Playing it safe means Jackson makes the money. If he tries to hard to make a good film and it backfires and it turns out to be terrible, he will be in the shits, something that has happened before (*cough John Carter *cough). Although, as with all theories, it has an exception, i.e. Transformers, terrible movies but made a truck load of money. Mmmm nostalgia effect.

I am going to use an American analogy here because it is easier, the older brother (The Lord of the Rings) is the quarterback of the football team and the school captain. He is the king of the school, all the girls want him and all the guys want to be him. It is now the first day of the year, his younger brother (The Hobbit) rocks up expecting to ride on his brother's successes. He is clearly the inferior sibling but some fall for this ploy, others are smarter and know what's going on. It is pretty clear that The Hobbit is riding on the successes of The Lord of the Rings. Something I think is going to work here because lots of people will go and see it. 

The pacing of this movie is less than desirable. It is not awful but it is no Wrath of Khan. That's to be expected when you try to make three movies from a 300 page kids book. Well one of these movies is from the appendices. Wait, appendices. That is like me publishing a scientific paper and trying to make as much money off a few tables of data and a photo of me next to the equipment with my thumbs up. Anyway, the pacing just seems way to deliberate. There is a lot of padding going on to ensure that it ends on a climax, i.e. having them sit around for 45 minutes at the start discussing their plans. this is to be expected however when you split an original story into two, something that has happened a lot lately, as in the final chapters of Harry Potter and Twilight. Harry Potter did it ok but, not that I have seen it, I heard Twilight stunk it up big time with part 2 featuring a 45 minute montage of every character that has appeared in the series. One montage even intertwines a character that has been played by two different actors. There is a reasonable climax at the end, I am just going to harp on this point, it should have been one movie!

Whilst there are some elements of the next installment I am looking forward to like Benedict Cumberbatch as Smaug/The Necromancer, I am not really hanging out to see it. I don't think it will even make my list of top 10 movies I am looking forward to next year (keep your eyes peeled). I will still see it, I just won't be having any sleepless nights over it. By the way, old Benny is going to be a hated man in the nerd community playing both Smaug and the villain in the new Star Trek movie (yes one review, two Star Trek references, winning!).

I have had a read through my review and it all seems pretty scathing. I think I have been a bit harsh because it is a reasonably good film. I am just frustrated due to the money grab factor. There are some good elements, like it is visually stunning and it is a solid story. The money grab factor was really consolidated when there were 30 minutes of adverts before it started!

Overall: I am not saying a film that I have given four stars, like say 21 Jump Street, is a better movie than The Hobbit, it is just not as good as it could be. 21 Jump Street got a good rating because I was expecting it to be bad and it was awesome, I was expecting the Hobbit to be much better. 3.5 stars

Next time: So many films to chose from, Les Miserables, Wreck it Ralph, Jack Reacher. It all depends when I get back to the movies.

Red Dawn

Red Dawn (2012)

Predicted Rating: 2.5 Stars

Directed by: Dan Bradley (Directorial Debut). Starring: Chris Hemsworth (Thor, The Avengers), Josh Hutcherson (The Hunger Games) and Adrianne Palicki (Supernatural).

A remake of the 1984 film of the same name starring Patrick Swayze and Charlie Sheen, Red Dawn follows Jed Eckhart (Hemsworth), who has recently returned home from a stint in the military. Upon his return, his home town of Spokane, Washington, is invaded by North Korea, as well as the majority of the US. Jed, along with his brother Matt (Josh Peck) and a group of friends escape to the surrounding hills. Here they form a terrorist group known as the Wolverines (named after Matt's football team) and fight to stop the North Korean invasion. Matt is torn between helping the Wolverines fight for justice and rescuing his girlfriend Erica (Isabel Lucas), who has been captured by the North Koreans

I went into this movie in a reasonably bad mood so before I sat down I expected to give this movie a bad review. My rational side at the time thought this may be a tad biased. Upon further reflection after the viewing, the negative review is fully justified! This movie is plain terrible. This is something I did expect but my plan for the evening was to sit in a darkened room with my popcorn and frozen coke and watch things blow up. This was really the only good part of the original. Up until Kill Bill rocked up, it was considered the most violent movie ever made based on the VAPM (Violent Acts per Minute) scale. This movie did not live up to any expectations. As a result of my dissatisfaction for this movie, and my inability to say anything positive, I will list all of my rants below in dot form.

• The camera work is absolutely awful, nauseating in most circumstances. I know having shaky cameras is supposed to represent chaos, something prominent in this film, but this just takes it to a whole new level. The car scene at the beginning is the prime example. I have seen a few car chases where the camera is supposed to be in the car but they have been watchable. The one in this movie is just plain sickening. I am glad I watched it on a small screen and not at the Titan XC or I might have needed a sick bag
• This is supposed to be a patriotic American film, did they not realise that two of the main actors are Australian! Hemsworth tries to do his best to sound American and does a pretty good job. Isabel Lucas is given as few lines as possible to hide her Paul Hogan style accent. I'd say she would say 10 words tops, so as a main character she might as well be a mute.
• Maybe this is a credit to Hemsworth pure manliness but Adrianne Palicki's love for him is almost unnatural. They are supposed to be the developing love interest of the story after exchanging looks at the start. However, it is not until about 75 minutes in the film that they share a word. After maybe 2 minutes of interaction, they go to make out but are rudely interrupted. I was thinking about not telling you the next part because it ruins the ending, but I advise not watching this film, so in the spirit of a good review I will ruin everything. Despite the sheer lack of anything between the two characters, Palicki is left utterly devastated, almost catatonic, when Hemsworth is killed, and I don't mean for a 5 minute period, for days and weeks after the event. All they did was almost make out, they weren't married for 30 years or anything.
• Josh Peck looks and sounds stoned all the time and it gets super annoying. That is all.
• I know he is supposed to be the developmental character who goes from wuss to super soldier, but come on Josh Hutcherson, you won the Hunger Games, you shouldn't be vomiting when you see a dead body. 
• I am sick and tired of seeing over aged actors playing high school students. Most of them are 26 or older and some don't even look remotely like they belong in a school, I am looking your way Adrianne. Also why does Matt have to be the quaterback of his school team. The characters of these movies are always quaterbacks. At least intertwine it in the film, like make him make some ridiculous grenade throw. Give another position a chance. When have you watched a movie when the tight end or free safety has been the hero.
• When are people going to learn to leave their emotions at home when fighting in a post-apocalyptic style battle. Most of the characters are killed because their, or someone else's emotions get in the way. Matt is fully responsible for a few deaths whilst trying to rescue his girlfriend. Then the majority of other deaths are caused by petty bickering. Connor Cruise (yes Tom and Nicole's son) comes the closest after offering to cut a tracking device out of himself. He convinced otherwise by the team and then boldly stays behind to fight. That's the way son!
• Sigh another remake. I will say it again and again, remakes can be good but in moderation. Also is this the right time for this movie, probably not.

So that's enough of my rant. Oh wait wait, I remembered something I liked. They do the scene when they get someone to be bait, who runs over to the rest of the wolverines who are hiding in holes. Once the enemy arrives they jump out and shoot everyone. Trust me, it is much more exciting to watch than trying to read my explanation.

Overall Rating: Fairly poor attempt to make an action film, could have been a whole lot better. 1.5 stars

Next Time: Torn between Les Miserables, The Hobbit and Wreck-It Ralph on Boxing day. A triple header sounds good but contrary to popular belief, I actually have a life so we will see how we go.

Skyfall

Skyfall (2012)

Predicted Rating: 4 Stars

Directed by: Sam Mendes (American Beauty, Jarhead). Starring: Daniel Craig (The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo, Cowboys and Aliens), Judy Dench (Shakespeare's in Love) and Javier Bardem (No Country for Old Men).

Picking up in Istanbul, secret agent James Bond (Craig) is pursuit of a criminal who has in his possession a stolen hard drive containing all the information of every agent placed in terrorism organisations around the planet. In the chase for the drive, Bond is appears to be fatally wounded by another agent and is thrown into the river. After the MI6 base is attacked, Bond returns with the mission to track down who has the missing drive.

I am probably not the best person to review this movie as I am not the biggest bond fan on the planet. I have only watched a half dozen of the other films and thought they were reasonably good without blowing me away. Or maybe I am a good person to review it because I can bring an impartial view to the singular film without being blinded by fandom. A conundrum that will be discussed for generations, wait probably minutes. Anyway enough of that, all I will be able to tell you is that this review is going to extremely short because I really can't think of much to write about. All I can really say it is a Bond film. Bond comes in, gets a mission, there are some action scenes, taps the bond girl, more action, movie over. So like I mentioned before, it is a solid film but it really didn't blow me away and made me think it was a fantastic film. The rave review from most critics seem unwarranted in some instances but hey, the public doesn't lie, it has already made an absolute truck load of money.

I was thinking, I would love to say this edition to the franchise brings x y and z new to the fold. However, as I have only watched a few a few of the other Bonds, I am grossly unqualified to make any such statement. From what I have gathered though, it really doesn't seem to introduce anything new. There are very few gadgets used, which seems to be consistent with the Craig films, but it would be cool to see one or two new gizmos. There also seemed to be a lot of the typical egotistical battles between characters where they use big words and stare at each other until someone gives up. There is also a huge reliance on the nostalgia factor trying to appeal to the diehards, and not so diehards. From the use of the DB5 to the introduction of characters who's true identity is not revealed until the end of the film ala Robin in the Dark Knight Rises. Oh no I ruined that for you, oh wait you should have seen it already! It all seemed a little tacky though and was unnecessary. Chatting with a big Bond fan afterwards, he was very disappointed with this factor, quoting the film as very camp.

My favourite part of the film was the villain. His back story wasn't very impressive, as he only wanted to kill M, rather than being hellbent on world domination like so many Bond villains have done in the past. However, he was very well played by Bardem, who is an Oscar winner by the way. He just seemed evil, like the dog from the Simpsons with the evil eyes, or when they put the dodgy music complementing the report on Groundskeeper Willie's home videos, he's Rowdy Roddy Peeper! He is no Hannibal Lector but Mr Silver adds something to what would be just a normal action film.

In the end all I can say that this was a solid film without being fantastic. It will satisfy the Bond fans as well as those who like action movies. Oh and it is not in 3-D, yes!

Overall: Good but not great, 3.5 Stars

Next Time: There is Sweet F.A. out until Boxing Day, where there is the Hobbit and Wreck-It Ralph. Looks like I will put out some reviews of classic films. January looks like a busy month though with Jack Reacher, Hitchcock, Paranorman and Django Unchained

Dredd 3D

Dredd 3D (2012)

Predicted Rating: 2 Stars

Directed by: Pete Travis (Vantage Point, End Game). Starring: Karl Urban (Lord of the Rings, Star Trek) and Olivia Thirlby (Juno, The Darkest Hour).

Dredd 3D takes place in the future (date unspecified so beware) where 800 million people live in a super city on the east coast of the US stretching from Boston to Washington DC (even though it was filmed in Johannesburg) as the rest of the country has been left inhabitable. Law and Order in Mega-City One is controlled by the Judges, acting as judge, jury and executioner. The story follows Dredd (Urban), who has been given the task or training the rookie Anderson (Thirlby), who is revealed to have powerful physic abilities. The Judges respond to a triple homicide at the 200 story mega structure known as Peach Trees, controlled by Ma-Ma and her drug mules. Ma-Ma catches drift of the Judges in the building and immediately shuts it down, preventing anyone from entering or exiting, and orders the assassination of the Judges. It is up to Dredd and Anderson to bring down the Ma-Ma clan and stop the supply of the deadly drug slo-mo.

First things first, this movie is bad-ass. It is action packed with very few moments to catch your breath. There is nothing better than throwing a whole people in a building, giving them guns and saying go. This is particularly evident in the Gatling gun scene (not as good as the one from Predator but it gives it a good crack) where an entire floor of the building, including its inhabitants, is destroyed. Getting past the violence, this film was actually surprisingly good. I was going in expecting a blood bath, which I got, but there were a few elements that surprised me. The first was when it revealed that Anderson had psychic abilities. I immediately thought, sigh, this is not X-Men, there is no way this could be good. However, it was moulded into the story extremely well. There was even a fantastic scene where Anderson gets into the head of one of the criminals, it is visually spectacular. The next is when Anderson "conveniently" reveals that she has left her helmet at home. Not so subtle guys but then you remember that Olivia Thirlby is ridiculously attractive and all is forgiven. Finally, at first the introduction of the corrupt Judges towards the end seemed out of place and unnecessary. Again, this ended up working quite well and tied the story together well.

I suppose the inevitable has been thrust upon us, I must compare this version to the original. Judge Dredd (1995) starred Sylvester Stallone and focuses on the story of Judge Dredd being framed for a crime he did not commit. I watched this film maybe 2 months ago and thought it was reasonable goof. The storyline was solid and there was that line delivered the only way Stallone knows, mumbled with no emotion. I am... the law! However one thing really ticked me off about the 1995 version, Rob bloody Schneider. He plays that damsel in distress character that we see so often in action films. There was only one problem, he is a bloke! This just makes him super annoying and in the end I didn't really care if he was killed. After watching the 2012 version, my opinion of the 1995 version decreased dramatically. The new film is far superior as it is how an action film should be, filled with action!

Following the fundamentals of movie making, i.e. plot, acting, character development and direction, Dredd 3D ticks almost all the boxes. The plot is fairly simple and almost non-existent but it really works for this movie. You can't really complain about the acting. Karl Urban was told to go and put on a dead pan performance that lacked any sort of emotion, which he did to perfection. I think it is time for me to talk in the same grizzly monotone voice all of the time. The direction of this movie was quite impressive. The second spot on my list of my favourite things of all time (yes this list can include anything that exists) is slow-motion. Slo-Mo is a pivotal aspect of the film, and the scenes involving it must be well directed to make it work. In the end they were. Some of them dragged out a little longer than they should of but overall they were well directed. The quality of direction was topped off with the scene I described above with Anderson getting in the criminals head. One thing that was not done well was the character development. It started off well the the introduction of Anderson with her abilities and her family, setting up some further explanation of her status. However, after maybe the first 20 minutes, it was completely forgotten about and many things were left unexplained.

In the end this was a decent film that surprised me. It is a solid action film but it is really one for the blokes again. There wasn't even an attempt to get Urban's shirt off to keep the ladies interested. However, I do recommend people go see this if you like some good old fashioned violence.

Overall Rating: Bad-ass bloodbath, 3.5 Stars

Next Time: Very quite period for decent movies till Christmas. This is 100% Twilight's fault. It will be a joyous occasion when it's release finishes as (I may eat my own words) it is the last instalment in what could be, wait, is most definitely the worst movie franchise of all time. I will probably go see Nitro Circus but whether you can review a movie of people hurting themselves, we can only wait and see. If not, Skyfall is out November 22, which should be awesome!

Paranormal Activity 4

Paranormal Activity 4 (2012)

Predicted Rating: 4.5 Stars

Directed by: Ariel Schulman and Henry Joost. Staring: Katie Featherston, Kathryn Newton and Brady Allen.

The fourth instalment of the Paranormal Activity franchise takes place six years after the events of the first two movies. The story follows jailbait Alex (Newton), who begins to notice strange happenings after the creepy kid across the street stays over after his mother is hospitalised. Alex, along with her boyfriend, decide to record all of the happenings using webcams strategically placed over the house. It is then revealed that the "mother" of the boy is Katie (Featherston) from the previous movies, then everything starts to hit the fan.

To let you all know, this review is going to be very one sided because I love all the Paranormal Activity movies! It has to be favourite movie series (sorry Friday the 13th and A Nightmare on Elm Street. I would have said Star Wars if George Lucas wasn't a dick and didn't make Eps 1-3). The first one blew me away with not relying on gore and building tension throughout the 90 minutes followed by a big ending. It also holds many records for being one of the most profitable films ever, costing just $15000 but making close to $200 million. The next three instalments then built on this tension factor fantastically. I know that these movies are not for everyone because people often get bored but you really have to get engrossed in the film and you will be scared shitless. I will try and put my reviewers hat on to give it a fair rating but I am not promising anything because I love these movies so much!

Once again a Paranormal Activity movie was almost ruined by the atmosphere in the cinema. I should learn by now not to see these movies there. The first film's viewing contained a bunch of 12 year old girls sitting at the back of the cinema that had obviously never seen a horror film before. The second film I decided to wait till it came out on DVD and watched it alone at midnight. This was the weaker of the films so I didn't feel the full effect of the experience. The third film saw me return to the cinema and this was the best experience as the cinema was essentially empty. The viewing of the fourth was by far the worst. The cinema was packed with teenagers that were obviously inexperienced and uneducated in horror movies. They were clearly scared but their reflex reaction to being petrified is to let out a bit of a whimper then laugh to reassure themselves and try and make their friends think they weren't scared but are secretly thinking I should have worn brown pants. These films rely on having long pauses of the same shot to build tension followed by a quick flash that makes you jump, whether it be a decoy or something that is important to the storyline. On multiple occasions, someone would jump the gun. This would cause the cinema to burst out in laughter through the bit that is supposed to be scaring, totally ruining the atmosphere. The two girls sitting in front of me were the worst. About 20 mins in I heard one say "I'm out." I was excited thinking they were going to leave but they hung around. I even managed to scare one of them with a sneeze. It is my dream to watch the next Paranormal Activity at the Titan XC cinema by myself.

As this is a tried and tested formula, i.e. things that go bump in the night recorded on hand held camera, there needed to be something in here that differentiated it from the other PA's. In the second instalment it was having the entire family involved, the third was having the camera on a rotating pedestal fan (something I don't think the director fully utilised), and the fourth introduced a couple of cool concepts. The first was using a shameless plug for the XBox Kinect. If you turn off all the lights and use an infrared camera you can see all of the sensors. This was cool when you got to see Toby (watch PA3 to find out who he is) moving through the sensors. The second new cool concept was using what I assume to be skype. Using skype introduces the stranded bystander who can see the happenings through the camera but cannot help the person in distress. This makes it feel like you are in the film but you can do nothing to help, a very cool concept. I am looking forward what they can come up with for Paranormal Activity 5.

OMG the ending! I really want to tell someone about the ending but the entire experience will be ruined so I will provide an analogy. It is like taking a stroll through the park with your partner on a nice sunny spring day and then being hit in the face with a sledgehammer and your attacker urinating on you. The atmosphere in the cinema was very peculiar at the end. A massive collective scream was followed by a blank look on everyone's face thinking dafuq just happen? The shock ending was almost perfected with the other Paranormal Activities but I think 4 did it the best. The Devil Inside tried the shock ending earlier this year and failed miserably (by the way The Devil Inside is my clubhouse leader for the worst film of 2012). However, once again I was left with many questions about what is going on so there will most certainly be a number 5. At this pace there will need to be about 14 or 15 sequels to fully explain what is going on.

Overall, this is strictly one for the fans. I absolutely loved it but if you are not a fan of the others don't worry about watching it, nothing drastic has changed. But if you like any of the others, get down to the cinema now! I really want to see it again! I also want to make one of my own. Also, if you read my other reviews, I really enjoy subtle references to other movies and PA4 has plenty. They include The Shining, Poltergeist and the Exorcist, see if you can spot them. At the moment, the order I rate the PA's is 1, 3, 4 then 2.

Overall Rating: Putting my reviewer hat on I would give it only 2 stars but I love these movies too much so... 5 Stars!

Next Week: I am... the law! Dredd 3D

Bait 3D

Bait 3D (2012)

Predicted Rating: Troll Cave

Directed by: Kimble Rendall (Tho Hoodoo Gurus). Starring: Julian McMahon (Fantastic Four), Martin Sacks (Blue Heelers), Xavier Samuel (Newcastle), Pheobe Tonkin (Tomorrow, When the War Began) and Lincoln Lewis (Home and Away).

A year after losing his best mate to a shark attack, Josh (Samuel) is working as a supermarket clerk when he runs into his ex-girlfriend (the walking rib-cage Sharni Vinson, who by the way I had no idea was 29). The supermarket is held up by Doyle (McMahon), which results in the death of a store worker. Then out of the blue a freak tsunami hit, completely engulfing the Gold Coast. The story then follows two groups of survivors, those who are trapped in the store and those who are trapped in the car park, both of which are being stalked by a Great White Shark.

There are two types of bad movies, those who are unbelievably bad that they become funny and entertaining  and those that are just plain bad they are tortuous. A good comparison to make to back-up the previous statement is Piranha 3D vs. Shark Night 3D. Piranha was a brilliant movie because even though the plot, acting etc. were terrible, at not one stage did it take itself seriously making it fun to watch. The opposite to that is Shark Night, even with Sara Paxton trying to hold the fort, it didn't hit the mark because it tried too hard. Unfortunately Bait 3D falls into the latter category. All it really did was take itself too seriously. The premise was there to make one of those "so bad that they are good" movies but it failed to hit the mark. There were so many opportunities to make cheesy one-liners. The ball was put on the tee to hit but it ended up like that one fat kid you had in your team that no matter how much he swung he didn't hit the ball. They didn't even say the title in the entire film. It would have been perfect, I am going to use myself as... pause for dramatic effect... Bait! Poor form.

At no time did I really care if any of the characters died or survived. You always enjoy a horror movie more if you pick someone that you would be devastated if they are killed and then a few characters where you wouldn't care, you might even be happy. Most of the time it is the attractive final girl for me who I would be in tears if they were killed off, whether it was Sara Paxton in Shark Night, Danielle Panabaker in Friday the 13th or Hayden Panettiere in Scream 4. In Bait I really didn't care about anyone. The person I probably rooted for the most was the guy in the car park downstairs. He was supposed to be the outcast of the group but in the end he had a smoking hot girlfriend. Pheobe Tonkin is attractive but she didn't play that character. Lincoln Lewis didn't cop any shit from his missus. Dr Doom tried to FSU. The guy from Singapore was heroic because he didn't rack a disciprine. In the end none of them were very relatable to me. Martin Sacks probably plays the strongest character but all I could think of the whole time was GET YOUR FUCKING FEET OUT OF THE WATER SACKSY! Oh and that's another thing, I have sworn more times in this review than the entire movie. Usually I would love that but you need it here. You don't see a shark coming towards you and say golly gosh I am about to be eaten.

In the end the trailer is much more exciting than the movie itself. It builds up so much tension, at first it looks like a romance looking at the broken relationship between Josh and Skeletor, I mean Tina. Then it turns into an action after the store is held up. Then another shocking twist occurs when a freak tsunami hits making it a survival final. Just when you think you had the genre nailed on the head, a not-so-massive shark wreaks having finally settling on a survival horror. I was so disappointed when I sat down because I was suspecting to relive this roller coaster ride on the big screen but it is revealed to be a shark movie at the start. The tragedy at the start needed to happen to build up the story but he didn't need to be attacked by a shark. You thought it could play a major part later on but it didn't eventuate. He could have been run over by a car or mauled by a donkey for all I care.

There are so many technical inaccuracies here that could of saved me from the torture that is Bait 3D.
Since when was there a major fault line off the coast of Queensland. I could of forgiven them if it took a significant amount of time for the tsunami to arrive after the quake but it was there in a matter of seconds. Also, aren't there shark nets on the gold coast? I realise they probably would have been destroyed by the wave but if the writers realised this we could have been saved from that god awful opening scene. I am going to apologise to all my Asian friends but you just don't see an Asian bloke with a white girlfriend, it just doesn't happen. You see it the other way round all of the time but this way I have seen it maybe 4 times, one of those was here. I also thought Australia was a world leader in special effects. They are rubbish here, I could have drawn better sharks using a blue biro when I was intoxicated. Finally, everyone who was killed in Bait 3D could have been saved through some proper risk identification techniques. Everything they did was extraordinarily dangerous and riddled with mistakes that could have been prevented. At one stage I was applauding one guy for wearing sufficient PPE when he makes a shark suit but then his bloody snorkel is too short. For all my Orica friends, the benefits of a Take 5 can be proven through this movie.

In summary, this movie was absolutely terrible. It wasn't even fun bad, it was just plain bad. Also when are people going to stop making shark movies. There is no way in hell any shark movie will be able to top Jaws so stop trying. Deep Blue Sea came the closest and I doubt you could even make a shark movie better than that. I know you can play on the fear of humans being out of their element in the water but try some other animal. One of the writers, Russell Malcahy, made a movie called Razorback about a rampant wild pig, how cool is that. Why not try something like being attacked by badgers and/or mongeese.

Overall Rating: 0.5 Stars. I was tempted to give it 0 but it was slightly better than Bridesmaids and the Devil Inside so I had to give it half a star so it wasn't in the same category.

Next Week: I was hoping to see Looper because I heard it was pretty good but I will be away all weekend so I may have to watch Taken 2 the week after. I will also be away for two weeks after that so I will miss out on Paranormal Activity 4, disaster!

WMR Classics: Horror Movie Weekend

Alright lets set the scene. It is a Saturday afternoon, I have finished all my housework, most people are out of town and there is a huge storm outside and it is forecaste for the entire weekend. What shall I do? I know, watch a horror movie. Well this ended up turning into four movies, but they were four phenomenal horror movies that I couldn't believe I hadn't seen before. These were, in order, Suspiria, Braindead, Jacob's Ladder and An American Werewolf in London. I will give a quick review of each but I will put this out there now, I recommend everyone should watch each of these movies if they have the chance.

Suspiria (1977)
Directed by Dario Argento. Starring: Jessica Harper, Stefania Casini.

This phsycological thriller tells the tale of a girl who moves from the states to Germany to join an elite dance academy. She is immediately met with some mysterious happenings, which begin to become more frequent. She then discovers that the dance troupe is run by a coven of witches and must escape before she is killed.

The scares in this movie are actually few and far in between but when they do come, boy do you know about it. The film relies on the long periods of suspense that build up to a few scenes that are designed to shock. An example of this is when the house is over run by maggots. It really plays no part in the over arching story but it really comes out of no where and it is as shocking as a scene involving maggots can be. It also does what many horror movie of the time aim to do, absolutely shock during the death scenes. You usually see the end for the characters coming, but how they happen is a huge surprise, mostly through the use of clever camera angles and a great soundtrack.

The suspense of the movie is enhanced through some stunning visuals. A lot of movies, especially horrors, around this time are grainy and lifeless but this one is just pretty. It uses the technicolour film (the last of which was made using the RYB technique similar to that in the Wizard of Oz) to the best effect and the dance academy is just spectacular.

You can tell that this movie is a European film as the English is slightly broken but other than that it is nothing short of spectacular. A horror classic. 5 Stars, possible Top 100 ever.

Braindead (1992)
Directed by Peter Jackson. Starring: Timothy Balme, Diana Peñalver.

After Lionel's (Balme) mother is bitten by a Sumatran Rat-Monkey after interupting him on a date with local shop keep Paquita (Penalver), she is turned into a mutant zombie. Lionel, still in denial over his mother's sort of not death, he keeps her locked in her basement along with three others she has infected. Mayhem ensues after they are let out during a party.

Three words spring to mind when watching this movie, stupid, gory and fun. This movie is classic Peter Jackson. Before he went mainstream with the Lord of the Rings trilogy, Jackson was the master of black comedy. With classics like Bad Taste and Meet the Feebeles, his creative genius was allowed to flow creating these movies that on the surface seem unbelievably stupid but when you dig down they are comedic masterpieces. I think Braindead is the best of these. It has so many moments that make you say really, like when a priest sweep kicks someones legs off, then you are left laughing your head off.

The second word I would use to describe this movie is gory. There is absolutely no shortage of fake blood in this movie. I though Kill Bill had the fountain blood down pact but this is something else. All I am going to say, the crescendo of the fight scene involves a lawn mower, best zombie destroyer ever.

Finally, this movie is just awesome fun. I had a smile on my face the entire time. Even things I usually find annoying in movies, such as the addition of an intentionally irritating character, in the form of the zombie baby, is done to perfection. Watch this movie! 5 Stars  

Jacob's Ladder (1990)
Directed by Adrian Lyne. Starring: Tim Robbins, Elizibeth Pena.

Jacob Singer (Robbins) is an ex-Vietnam vet who is haunted by his past in the war as well as his divorce and the death of his youngest son (an uncredited cameo by McCaulay Calkin). He begins to lose his sanity but then must realise what reality actually is.

As far as my watchings of the weekend, this is probably the weakest film of the four. Not to say that this is a bad movie, it is fantastic, it just seemed to lack something the other movies had. It didn't have the thrills of Suspiria, the comedy of Braindead and the underlying themes in An American Werewolf in London. It is that extra element that usually makes a horror movie special. Jacob's Ladder is probably more of a thriller in that sense. It attempts to play on the raw emotions of the viewer to achieve it shocks rather than having people brutally murdered or things jump out in your face. In that sense, this movie does it almost to perfection. It is very well paced with the "wow" moments thrown in at just the right time. The performance by Tim Robbins is also quite believable and really adds to the experience.

A very good movie that was really overshadowed by the others I watched over the weekend. 4 Stars

An American Werewolf In London (1981)
Directed by John Landis. Starring: David Naughton, Jenny Agutter

Two Americans are hiking through the British moors when they are attacked by a werewolf, killing one and wounding the other. The wounded party, David Kessler (Naughton), falls for his British nurse (Agutter) and must juggle becoming a werewolf with his new love.

This is not your normal slasher horror in the traditional sense. It relies more on realising the fact that this could happen to anyone rather than relying on blood and gore. It also builds on the relationship between the two main characters much more than any other horror I have seen.

It takes a while to really appreciate this movie for what it really is. After watching it I really wasn't blown away by it but after thinking about it for a couple of days it really grew on me. The ending was something that at first disappointed me but then pleased me. It was both tragic and necessary at the same time. It is often imitated but never replicated.

A horror movie staple that is perfect for beginners to the genre. 4.5 Stars

Overall this was a very good weekend of movie watching. Suspiria was probably the best movie here but I am going to say that Braindead is the pick of the bunch. It never took itself seriously and was just good fun to watch.

I am going to do some classic movie reviews more often, so if anyone has any suggestions let me know. Next time I will have a look at Troll 2.