At first glance an inevitable comparison to the Kevin James vehicle 'Paul Blart' springs to mind. To be fair you wouldn't be all that far off either, the whole basis for this film is very similar lets be honest. Both characters are working as security men in a mall and are wannabe cops. Both characters are portrayed as taking their job way too seriously when in reality they are merely shop attendants in a blue uniform. And both characters try to change their lives by applying for a job on the police force despite everyone thinking they haven't got a chance.

So yeah its pretty similar, the only major difference is the fact Rogen's character in this film is more unhinged and eerily prone to violent anger outbursts. This of course can be hilarious at times with Rogen's great comic personality and chubby features, but at the same time its also a bit disturbing and uncomfortable too.

There are plenty of scenes in this which made me laugh out loud, the way 'Ronnie' (Rogen) organises his small team of security men with the up most importance, as if they were special ops. His awkwardness around sexy perfume saleswoman 'Brandi' (Farris perfectly cast as your typical airhead blonde...again), the way he acts with jealousy around real cop 'Harrison' (Liotta), his ongoing feud with Arab shopkeeper 'Saddamn' and the way he exposes himself as slightly deranged, depressive and possibly dangerous to various people, especially in the police psychological examination.

On the flip side there are times when the film feels ugly, vicious, a bit sad and over the top with the violence, profanity and blood. The sequence where Rogen's character takes 'Brandi' out for a meal, she gets drunk and then they end up having sex, is rather dubious. Why? because 'Brandi' is completely out of it and vomiting whilst 'Ronnie' is banging her. It does seem a tad like rape, but at the same time the sight of Farris' head lurching to one side with puke on the pillow whilst 'Ronnie' goes at it is amusing I can't deny, a nervous laugh there.

There are other moments throughout which seem to go a bit too far also, showing 'Ronnie's' anger, the fight with the cops and Liotta's character, and the finale for the flasher. Its all kinda funny but kinda edgy too, at times you're thinking 'is it OK to laugh at this?'.

Saying this is a dark comedy is an understatement, its darkly dark alright and Rogen's cynical, sinister, in your face performance will either leave you laughing, cogitating or hating. I think I prefer this over the Kev James film simply because Rogen's performance is appealing to me here plus this film is more grounded ('Blart' goes goes down that 'Die Hard' route...). The ending is a bit simple and anti climatic but its a totally fun and rather controversial ride to get there.

Not really much better than the first film, are you surprised?, in fact the effects are less impressive and less frequent also making the film rather dull to say the least...again would this be a surprise?.

Payne reappears in this sequel despite seemingly being killed convincingly in the first film (minus his blue lipstick) but this time he's up against a team of five challengers. These five challengers/adventurers are the most boring and unimaginative looking set I've seen in an adventure film, surprisingly female orientated the team look drab and silly, admittedly close to D&D lore but uninspiring none the less.

The whole film is pretty dull really with nothing much happening right up until the end where there is some decent dragon action, I think D&D followers will get more of a kick out of this but newcomers will be less enthralled. I have seen worse but this isn't quite as cheesy as the first, now that must be a surprise.

Hmmmm what to think of this little gem hehe I saw this at the cinema on release (yes) and at the time I kinda liked it for some reason, now upon a rewatch I can't see why I thought that.

I guess at the time the effects were a little more impressive than today's standards of course plus there weren't the huge amount of fantasy films that there are these days so this was quite a special little event. Looking back now it really is a terrible film, the acting from everyone is just abysmal and full O' cheese. Irons goes beyond taking the piss really with his rather queer hissing, cackling and facial expressions whilst his second in command played by Bruce Payne is just the campest guy I've seen for ages...oh and he has blue lipstick on too.

The film revolves around the cliched to max partnership of Wayans (doing his best Eddie Murphy impression) and Whalin trying to be heroic and cool. The pair are just awful together and completely unamusing in every sense, there is of course a lot of attempted humour throughout but it all falls flat on its face hard.

There really is nothing to recommend here other than to laugh at, the effects are the worse CGI you will have seen for a major release (even though its an old film yes I know), tonnes of obvious bluescreen and even the costumes, makeup jobs and props all look cheap and tacky.

I still can't understand why Irons would agree to this, ditto Richard O' Brien ('The Rocky Horror Picture Show' and quite the cult name here in the UK). I suppose its because his scenes were a homage to the classic 'Crystal Maze' he once hosted, almost a homage to him really, the guy is legend but this brings him down.

The film was indeed mauled upon release but at the time (twas much younger back then) I gave it some leeway, it kinda reminded me of the 'Mortal Kombat' film and how, even though it was weak, it still had a glimmer of quality. But now I simply cannot allow that leeway anymore, the film may be enjoyed by younger kids but basically its crap.

1993 was a big year for Mr Stallone, not only did this huge box office success come out but later that year we were presented with 'Demolition Man'. Oddly enough this was also the last year where Stallone's movies managed success, after 1993 his work went downhill considerably and only got back on track in 2008 with his [i]Rambo[/i] reboot/sequel.

This film could well be the first 'Die Hard on a' example to come along, 'Die Hard on a mountain'? meh maybe its just me?. The whole thing is your standard action fare really, nothing original and nothing fresh. A bunch of bad guys after lost millions on a mountain, hostages, plenty of gunfire, plenty of blood, lots of profanity and an evil caddish bad guy boss to equal Rickman's 'Hans Gruber'.

I must admit I never really liked this film as it just feels too run of the mill, accept for being based on a mountain of course (mountainous snowy terrain). I've always been in the Arnie camp personally I never really thought Stallone could match up with his efforts. I simply cannot look at this film without thinking of 'Die Hard/Die Hard 2', its such a copy, really it is, right down to Lithgow's corny British villain.

The action isn't all that impressive either really, a mixture of highly dangerous stunts which are admittedly good enough to make your palms sweat, and blatantly obvious sets. One minute the film looks sweet as a nut with some lovely location shots and real live action, the next you're looking at some crappy bluescreen effects or an obvious plastic rubbery set. Actually to be honest the film is a bit drab looking for the most part, lots of grey and white rocky terrain.

The entire cast in this film is pretty boring too, the bad guys aren't really very interesting but that's cos we don't really get to know them. All the good guys n gals are just wet and annoying, Rooker's character does so much slow motion running and screaming its hilarious, did this film start that trend?!. Only Lithgow holds things together with his hammy campness, problem there is he doesn't really look right for the part nor does he look like he could beat up Stallone, but his evilness is fun.

Can't deny the film is a blast of adrenaline with its ridiculous moments of sheer dumbness. Stallone climbing up the rockface in his t-shirt, then whilst under the frozen icy water he removes everything and goes topless! why exactly? but hey this is a stupid action thriller what do you expect. A decent flick for the Stallone camp but its complete lack of realism and easy to spot stunt doubles/bad effects are all too clear. Great film title though.

Wholly crap another novel adaptation! I was surprised to discover this character was actually the guy Mel Gibson portrayed in 'Payback', that did then ring a bell seeing as the characters in both films are the same, anti heroes. Back then the rights to the character name 'Parker' weren't there apparently.

So the plots to this adaptation and 'Payback/The Hunter' are virtually the same! 'Parker' is betrayed by a gang, shot and left for dead. He then proceeds to spend the entire film going after those who betrayed him. The problem here is the whole film is spread out with absolutely nothing of interest merely to see 'Parker' get revenge at the end. The film only had to be about 30min long and that would sufficed.

The cast is a terrible mistake, every one. Statham is not the guy you want for a supposedly dark noir crime thriller (according to the original source), his presence merely lowers this films intelligence levels and gives everyone the wrong impression before seeing it. You know most people will be expecting a martial arts filled 'Expendables' type flick.

The bad guys don't seem very bad at all, I mean they are not nice but they're hardly hardened criminals. Chiklis as the leader isn't threatening ever, I dunno why but he just looks like he's gonna burst out into slapstick. Another guy looks like a young Jon Cryer which isn't too good and Clifton Collins Jr. who is normally good for a violent nutter is very quiet.

Then we have the car crash that is Lopez, dear lord how does this woman find work in Hollywood?!. She can't act, she's no good in a thriller like this and constantly ruins scenes, she looks like your typical wrinkled, bony, middle aged rich LA residing female with heaps of makeup and hairspray plastered on and all she does in this film is whine. It amuses me when these mega rich stars portray working class characters that are down on their luck, because they have no idea what its like to be in that situation.

Its all very slick and glitzy with the glamorous Florida locations, fancy cars and huge mansions set against a sunkissed sky, you'd think it was a Bond flick. But none of this really seems to fit together well, it all feels bog standard and tired, amazingly generic, even the films poster is drab and uninspiring.

A very mundane below par action film bottom line, no different from many other Statham efforts that have gone directly to DVD, did not pass go and did not collect $200. The whole thing is so utterly pointless, unoriginal and unexciting because apart from the very start and the very end there is nothing happening. 'Parker' simply wonders around breaking in here and there and stealing cars whilst all the while looking highly obvious while he does it.