Showing 1 - 6 of 6 Reviews
Not enough votes yet! Vote for your favorite (and least favorite) reviews below.
Posted on 10/17/10 03:47 PM
When I first heard about this film I thought it was a mixture between daring and bad taste. When I saw it, there were no bad taste to be found anywhere. This is just straight-out funny.
I've heard people complaining how it's humanizing terrorists, which I can only answer with this: Terrorist are humans. Are they nice humans? They could be, but they have made some serious bad decisions in their life. The audience never thinks that the terrorist are right, we never want them to succeed, we just want them to stop thinking like fucktards.
You could compare "Four Lions" with "The Untergang". Yes, they are two totally different films, but they both deal with people who should be automatically hated. We don't want the see what is on the other side of coin, because then maybe our reality would fall apart. If we can no longer seperate friend from foe, who can I know who to trust?
And while the movie brings forth these questions, it still makes us laugh. So, see this movie. Trust me, it's a real blast.
Posted on 10/02/10 12:40 AM
I remember when I saw the trailer: at first I just thought it was somewhat funny with a great premise, but in the end, when they slaughter a bunch of nazi-zombies with some classical music in background (call me an ignorant, but I don't know the name of the song), I get an eye-orgasm. I know I had to see this movie.
The movie kicks off with a chase-scene scored with the classic piece "Hall of the mountain king" (see, me know me cultural stuff), which pretty much sets the tone for the rest of the film. I admit that it can be considered kind of slow in its pace after that, but it works for me, because after that its pretty much full mayhem forward. Emphasizing on the mayhem-part, because it features some really mindblowing gore (pun intended).
The movie is also quite aware of itself, which I always like about horror-comedies. It brings a few nods to the whole slasher-genre, and movies in general, with the character "Erlend" who is a movie-nerd. It also tips its har towards the "Evil Dead"-series and, at least from my point of view, Edgar Wright's movies.
All in all, it takes a great concept and runs with like crazy. And that's a winner in my book.
Posted on 9/29/10 02:31 AM
WTF Sly?! You had pretty much everything going for you here. How did you manage to fuck it up? The idea was just as simple as it was brilliant: get a bunch of actiondudes and go mental. Why, oh why, didn't you just do that? No one asked for character depth or a message, if you just blowed some shit up. The sideplot with Statham was as unneccessary as it was boring. Why waste a bunch of screentime to humanize someone who the audience only interest is in how high his bodycount is. Then Sly treat us with a bunch of conversations that have some underlying philosophical questions, the only question that lingers is: why isn't Stallone faceraping some random bad guy with his fists?
When you have assembled this kind of ensemble, the audience except some serious mayhem from all of them. Sure enough, they all get their moments to shine, but it's too little, too late. In the beginning of the film we are introduced to the whole Expendables-team, but then Terry Crews and Randy Couture vanish until it's time for the final showdown. And if that weren't a criminal waste to begin with, the wasting continues with the Jet Li and Dolph Lundgren. Jet Li has been one of the top martial arts action-stars for while now, but the only time we can see just a fragment from what he can do is in a fight with Dolph. Before and after he that Jet spend most his time shooting people. That's like having a pornstar ironing your socks. And doesn't get much screentime either. After the fight with Jet, he's out and we are only half-way through the movie. But he gets a very moving deathscene with Sly.
The finally we have the actionparts, which this movie would be all about. This was supposed to be a throwback at the old action-classic of the 80's. Do you know what those movies had? Real explosions. No CGI-explosions, but real. And these movies were made with a budget that were considerable smaller than what The Expendables was made of. How come did they have the budget to use real explosions? I know this is a petty thing to nag about, but this was one thing SLy clearly stated when he began with this movie. Why did you cheat us?
Posted on 9/29/10 02:29 AM
It has become quite clear the last five years, that if you want a good horror flick, you'll have to turn your head to France. This movie is the epitome of French of horror. Sure, it's not as twisted as Haute Tension (High Tension or Switchblade Romance, depending on where you're from) or as psychologically demanding as Martyrs, but damn it, it got frenzy to spare.
The story in itself is quite conventional - a couple of young people ends up lost in the countryside and make a really bad stop. The hostel they decide to stay is run by a family of inbreed Nazis who eat people. You know the drill. But as I said before, what distinguish this movie from other similar slasher-films, is the frenzy. The panic. Because as soon as the killing starts, you start to feel for these people. In ordinary slashers there's no emotion, just death after death with people you can not feel for. Often because they act stupid all the time. In FrontiŤre(s) you can feel the protagonist's struggle for survival, which makes you emphasize with them. You want them to survive, yet you know that won't happen.
When I bought the dvd it said on the front: "the most brutal movie ever made". Is brutal? Yes, it is, but "most"? I don't believe so. The reason it is believed to be brutal, is that the violence feel more real. It's still over-the-top, though, but as I've stated before, you feel the characters and therefore you can also feel the violence they are being put through. And one thing that was quite interesting is that the scenes that were most uncomfortable to watch, wasn't the scenes of extreme gore, but the more simple ones, such as the cutting of Achilles' tendon.
Then we have GŲtz. I will not say more than. Just GŲtz. Motherf*cking (probably even literally) GŲtz.
Posted on 9/26/10 01:59 PM
I stumbled across this movie by chance. Or was it by chance? Never mind. I will be trying to explain the plot as a whole, because 1) you will probably not get any wiser and 2) it will sound retarded as fuck, all I can say is this: a monster named Ink kidnaps a girl, the father tries to save the girl and during this time there's a war between those who bring you good dreams and those who give you bad dreams. Sounds cheesy, huh? Actually, it's quite a heartwarming story (I usually hate that stuff) that looks surprisingly good for a indie-flick. The acting might not be top-notch all the time, but it's good enough so that you won't get annoyed about it.
But the acting is really secondary to the direction here. I believe that the term "auteur" is a bit overused, to the point of losing its meaning, but I can't find a better word to describe it. Winans has really put in an effort in its details. This is especially noticeable in scene where one character orchestrate a series of events. It's beautiful.
Sure, the ending might be a bit predictable, but this is really more about the travel to get there. Damn, that sounded cheesy.
Posted on 9/24/10 07:35 AM
I had absolutely no intentions to see this movie, but it was the first 3D-movie to hit a theatre near and I wanted see how 3D looks. Since I don't have anything to compare it with, I can only say that the 3D works when the movie doesn't throw it in your face (literally). The movie itself picks up the stupidity level from the last two and keep it running. The first movie at least tried to stay true to the game. Now we just have completely ridiculous story with a few nods to the game here and there (like the big axe-swing dude from RE5). These elements are put there just to please the fans of the games, which is quite funny when you think about it, because the only thing the fans want to see is this franchise more dead than a chipmunk in a tub of acid. But that won't happen since it ends with quite the cliffhanger. On a plus side, we at least know how Michael Jordab would handle himself in the events of a zombie-apocalypse.