nixon k.'s Profile - Rotten Tomatoes

Want-to-See Movies

This user has no Want to See movie selections yet.

Want-to-See TV

This user has no Want to See TV selections yet.

Rating History

The Shining
The Shining (1980)
6 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes

Stanley Kubrick has been and probably will always be one of my faviourite directors. He has an amazing visual sense and also has a very cryptic way of creating movies. I have loved nearly all of Kubrick?s films, The Shining being no exception. Although ridiculed as a drawn out and boring adaptation of Stephen Kings book when it first came out The Shining is one of those movies that has done more than just stood the test of time, it has evolved and become something more after its initial release. Kubrick turns this from a haunted mansion book to a psychological mind fuck of a film, to put it bluntly. Although I do respect and like the original book I believe that it is surpassed by Kubrick?s brilliance in nearly every facet, he throws out the pointless background stories and hokey poltergeist parts(namely a wasp hive and attack from the hedge creatures) and adds a sense of paranoia and surrealism that only Kubrick could ever achieve.

The movie opens up with Jack Torrance (Jack Nicholson) applying for a caretaker job at the Overlook Hotel, were he plans to stay there for the winter while the roads are snowed in forcing thehotel to close for the season. Jack plans to stay there with his wife Wendy (Shelly Duvall) and their son Danny (Danny Lloyd). Even though Manager Stuart Ullman (Barry Nelson) warns him about one of the previous care takers who got cabin fever and brutally murdered himself and his family Jack still seems fairly determined to get the job. Once he is given the job his family arrives at the hotel where they are shown around, were they meet Dick Hallorann (Scatman Crothers) who realises that he and Danny share a gift called the Shining, the gift to speak telepathically to other people with the gift. Once the family is left alone it becomes clear that something isn?t right about the hotel and that room 237 is to blame.

The Stephen King Novel has never really held up to the movie in my opinion. The book seems dated and just another Haunted house film where as the Kubrick film focuses more on Jack?s character( but not his pointless background) and what eventually drives him insane which leaves the viewer the question as to whether the hotel is indeed haunted or if it is all in his mind. Also I appreciate the fact that Danny?s role has been severely cut who was seemingly the main character in the book. Thankfully the ?Shining? aspect of Danny?s character has also been significantly cut, which just seemed like a lazy way of progressing the story. However the best change I think Kubrick did was the personality shift of Jack Torrance. In the book is this short tempered but well meaning person who is pushed beyond his limits by the hotel?s ghosts; on the other hand in the movie Jack Torrance always had a very menacing tone about and maybe the isolation is what caused him to capitulate. Now it may seem like all I?m doing is bashing the book but I actually really like the book, in fact I?ve really enjoyed nearly most of Stephen King?s books. I just felt that the book was well written but honestly Kubrick re-wrote it a lot better.

It?s fair to say that the performance of Jack Nicholson is one of the reasons why this film is so well loved; he was born to play a deranged psychopath. The way he transforms his character on screen is marvelous as he his mask of sanity slowly slips off. Shelly Duvall has copped a lot of criticism for her performance; in fact she was nominated for a razzie for her role as Wendy. I believe that she doesn?t deserve all the criticism as she played the role of an ?abused? wife extremely well. At times she actually reminded me of Rita from Dexter, maybe it?s because of the similarities in their characters or maybe it?s because I?ve been watching too much Dexter. Danny Lloyd does a pretty good job as Danny but really never feels or acts like a main even when he is the focus of his scenes.

I really wasn?t surprised when I found out Kubrick was a photographer before he became a director, his amazing visuals and cinematography should be proof enough he had photographic roots. There are so many beautiful shots in this film from the tracking shot of the car travelling through to the Overlook Hotel to the hallway scenes where Danny is riding his bike to even the scene were Jack is in the Bathroom with Grady, it feels like I?m seeing pictures come to life. You may have noticed that I have been referring everything about the film to be Kubrick?s work, which isn?t too far from the truth. Scenes could be re-shot over two-hundred times until Kubrick was happy with what he got. He did all this for a reason; he wanted his vision to come to life. There was an agenda Kubrick was trying to get through to the audience, although it was a very subtle one. I mean have you ever noticed that a figure can be seen in the river of blood scene? Kubrick shot this scene nearly thirty times so it is very doubtful that it was an oversight. There are so many hidden messages and different interpretations that there still is no definitive answer as to what the overall message was, although the most common theory is that it?s about Native Americans.

What I love most about this film is the ambiguity it has. Is the hotel haunted or is Jack suffering from cabin fever? Why are there two Gradys? Why is Jack In the photo that was taken in the twenties? Why is there a guy in a bear suit giving someone a blowjob? What is in the river of blood? I just love the fact that Kubrick has left it to self interpretation instead of conventionally wrapping everything up, it adds this extra layer of surrealism and it leaves you wondering what just happened. It has a similar effect Inception had except The Shining is definitely not for the mainstream audience. I love that it has been turned from just a conventional ghost story to a psychological one. I have always been a big fan of psychological horror films and this is probably the best, it leaves you with the question of who to trust. Do you trust the kid who probably has a mental illness? Do you trust the Father that is stricken by Cabin Fever? Or do you trust the broken down housewife? If I had to choose I don?t? think I trust any of them honestly??.

Although the movie may start off slow it really is all about building tension, whether it?s tension between the characters or it?s tension between the viewer and the movie. The scenes in the bar and the bathroom are so well done that you forget about that they don?t exist. I also love the way the scene in the bathroom between Grady and Jack slowly changes from pleasantries to the possibility of killing his wife and son. Jack Nicholson really shines in this scene as he slowly begins to warm to the possibility of axe murdering his family; it?s a joy to watch. I also can?t fail to mention the last act of the film where Jack finally snaps. ?I?m not going to hurt you??.. I?m just going to bash your head in. Bash it right the fuck in!!? Jack Torrance yells classics like that at Wendy with such determination, as if the tremendously long film shoot has actually driven him insane. Even the final foot chase through the maze had me on edge as it is never revealed how far ahead Danny is, Jack couple be a couple steps or away or he couple a couple hundred.

If you haven?t seen this film yet then you should go out and buy it on Blu Ray immediately it?s such a beautiful film that the fact that it was made over thirty years ago doesn?t even hold it back from looking like a marvel. I know that a lot of people will have completely different opinions towards the film and may even prefer the book to the film but I just can?t deny my love for this film! It has a great soundtrack, beautiful cinematography, a psychopath (I?ve always found crazy characters so much more interesting), great visuals, creepy characters and enough ambiguity to keep you talking about it a week after watching it.
I have to admit I felt sick in the stomach after reading about the mixed reviews and the razzi nominations when it first came out, I couldn?t believe what I was reading! However if you really think about it back then it probably just seemed like just another horror film trying to cash in on the slasher genre, so when it took ages to begin and only had a body count of two it?s reasonable for people to be negative about it.

Also the fact that it was so different from the book probably pissed people off as well. That being said I?m still thankful that it was made back then, if it had been made nowadays it probably would be lacking the subplots and hidden messages and would feature everything in cg also I wouldn?t be surprised if the last act of the film would have been shot all shaky cam. Just thinking about it makes me angry! Thank god for Kubrick!!!!

Scott Pilgrim vs. the World
6 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes

I never really had high hopes for Scott Pilgrim vs the world, from the trailer it seemed like it may have just been another one of those Michael Cera mumble core films like in all of his films, the premise did seem a little interesting but some of the jokes were a little cringe-inducing. However even with some reservations I decided to see it a couple of days after release mainly due to the fact that Edgar Wright is the director. I mean how can the director of Shaun of the Dead and Hot Fuzz stuff up a movie that already had a solid story and a successful graphic novel attached to it? Well short answer he didn?t, the long answer??.

Scott Pilgrim (Michael Cera) is dating Knives Chau (Ellen Wong) who he is using her as a rebound from his ex-girlfriend, Envy Adams (Brie Larson). Scott plays in a band called ?sex bob-omb?, they are performing in the next battle of the bands, much to Knives joy. When accompanying Knives to the library Scott see?s quite literally the girl of his dreams, Ramona flowers (Mary Elizabeth Winstead). Scott eventually re-meets Ramona and after miserably failing at picking her up he begins to ask around about her. Scott eventually finds out that she works for Amazon and after ordering something off the site he is able to nag her into a ?date?, that?s when Scott?s problems become tenfold.

There is a very thin line between parody films, you could be subtle with the references like in Edgar wrights? previous films that are never shoved into your face, and anyone who is unaware of the joke wouldn?t even know it?s there. Or you could take the more direct route of making the film all parody which not only divides the viewers who don?t understand the references and are left wondering what they just watched but also makes the film become self aware in the worst way, yes you should know by know what movies I am talking about. This film is definitely the first option, unsurprisingly. In heart Scott Pilgrim isn?t even a parody film, it?s a love letter just like Hot Fuzz and Shaun of the Dead were. The comedy is incredibly well done I never felt tired of the same jokes being thrown at me, the dialogue was very fluent and I can?t ever remember it feeling the least bit fake and most of all I think it?s fair to say Michael Cera has FINALLY evolved his acting skills in this film.
Edgar Wright definitely has left his mark on this film, the fast cuts are still there, the fluency of scene changes are still amazingly well done and its obvious he has learnt from past mistakes (although very few they are). It amazes me just how well he has transferred he skills from Hot Fuzz to Scott Pilgrim, it feels like he has been filming these type of films his whole and he is really close to perfecting it as well which considering how different his last film was to this one is quite a remarkable feet indeed. This film would have lost several marks if it hadn?t been directed by Wright. Think about it gone would have been the fast paced cuts and a lot of the dialogue has Shaun of the Dead written all over it also the action would also have had suffered without Wrights ingenious camera angles . The fact that he brings that much to a film is a sign of a great director. I mean honestly stuff Nolan and Tarintino fan boys I want to be with the Edgar Wright posse.

Mary Elizabeth Winstead brings so much to the role of Ramona that it kind of exploits some of the weaknesses in Pilgrims character. Don?t get me wrong I thought Michael Cera did a great job as Scott Pilgrim and I feel that I?ve seen him turn from a one trick pony to a proper actor on screen but he is really over shadowed by Mary?s performance of Ramona. Knives Chau is also well played and written and is such an entertaining character. I can find hardly any bad performances in this whole film, every character was so well written and different that there were times were I completely forgot this was a fantasy film. Speaking of fantasy I must mention the 7 evil ex?s, there may have not been much set-up or explanation (which really wasn?t needed) for them but they still owned the screen and each one of them were so completely different in their own awesome ways. The characters of the ex-boyfriends had such great angles to them that I didn?t even really care about their back stories, which were the only real downfall of this film. If I had to choose a favorite ex I would probably choose Roxy Ritcher (Mae Whitman) mainly due to the fact that she had my favorite fight scene involving Ramona in the whole film, although following behind Roxy would easily be Todd Ingram (Brandon Routh).

The stylized violence and just the overall style is superb. To start off with the action is done so well It really was something completely original and really stands out from any other action film. I haven?t seen the expendables and don?t really have much interest to but I?m nearly one hundred percent sure that all the action in Scott Pilgrim is so much more inventive, fun and adrenaline pumping. Nothing any action movie this year throws at me will match it. However Now I?m going to delve into the real star of the film, the video game effects. I can?t praise this film enough for how it?s turned such everyday things into these amazingly colourful and action packed affairs. The visual effects are astoundingly well done and are seamlessly placed in the film to great comical effect. I find it hard to articulate my love for this film!! It?s such a amazingly well crafted and rounded film that has so much going for it I find it hard to believe people could dislike the film!

Maybe it?s because of my age but I have fallen in love with this film, it has so much originality, well written characters and humour and such great visuals. Although I may be in deep love with this film I think it may be polarized by the age group of the viewer. When I was watching this I could see my friends and myself doing the same things and saying the same things it was quite uncanny, this film is obviously intended for people like me. If you?re not into video games, pop culture or even indie music then there?s a remote chance that you?ll dislike this film. In summary I don?t think I could ever ask for a better representation of a hipster?s life ever. EVER.

Now one quick gripe I want to mention I found while reading a few reviews of Scott Pilgrim vs. the world is that a lot of people as referring to the audience of this film as the ?ADD generation? to which I take huge offence towards that statement. Honestly it really is basically saying that ?retards like you will enjoy this film only because there are bright flashing lights and explosions? it?s such a completely degenerative and bitter thing to say. Most of these people are likely to look down on teenagers as low lives and constant trouble makers, it really just is a way of trying to distance themselves from people like me. It may not seem that bad but it?s such a degrading statement that I had to bring it up.

Inception (2010)
6 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes

Inception really is that thinking man?s masterpiece I?ve been waiting a long time for. It blends amazing special effects, heart pounding action, beautiful cinematography and to top it off it gives us a mind bending story that will really bend your mind. Although this film is not for everyone the people who this film is catering towards will absolutely love the experience. This is Christopher Nolan?s masterpiece.

Dominic Cobb (Leonardo DiCaprio) and Arthur (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) are mercenaries who specialize in extracting info from people?s dreams. The two are hired by Cobol Engineering to extract important information from the head of a rival company, Siato(Ken Watanabe). After failing to retrieve the information Siato is so impressed with their mind stealing skills that he asks them to perform ?Inception?, the act of planting an idea in someone?s mind, the target being Robert Fischer (Cillian Murphy) who?s father is Siato?s cooperate rival. Cobb accepts the job highly aware of the consequences but driven by the chance of being finally being re-united with his children.

There is so much good about this movie that it?s hard to know where to start from. Admittedly i had already decided what I was going to think about this movie before I saw it; I thought it was going to be a visual delight with wooden characters and a muddled plot. Having just seen it a second time I can safely say that the visuals were as amazing as I expected, the characters were deep and emotional and the plot still has me guessing everything I saw in the last 5 minutes of the film. Christopher Nolan has really excelled in this film; he?s set a bench mark for not only special effects standards but also story telling standards.
Leonardo DiCaprio plays the role of Cobb masterfully, you really feel for what he has suffered through and you really want to see him return to his estranged children. Joseph Gordon-Levitt also puts on a great performance, although there is no real character development or background to his character you still feel his on screen presence and all of the charisma he has as an actor. Ellen Page is good in her role however she really is a hollow character that seems to fit in the film just to explain who Mal is and why she is lurking in Cobb?s subconscious, she has no other purpose then exposition. However on the other hand Mal (Marion Cotillard) really does steal the show with an amazing performance, you really feel that she is more of a shadow of what Cobb remembers and not what she may have been in real life. Cillian Murphy was surprisingly good, I expected him to be the cliché ?bad guy? of the film but instead he really is more of a victim than anything else and I really sympathized with him. Even Ken Watanabe who in any other film would just be another filler character, he however brought such presence to such a small role.

The visuals are a show stealer alone. This is one of the most beautiful films I have seen, I mean just the way they shot Cobb falling into the bath of water was amazing. Wally Pfister, the cinematographer really deserves all the praise he gets for his efforts. On the special effects side however some of the dream sequence special effects shots are mind boggling. The scene was the city folds onto itself had me gripping my seat and my blood was pumping, it really brought me into the wonder and imagination of the dream world. Although amazing the visuals are it also brings out my biggest disappointment in this film, the under use of crazy physics in the dream. Although I understand Christopher Nolan wanted to keep a sought of realistic tone to the film I do feel he could have taken the rules of the dream world and bent them even further.

What differs this from any other film I?ve seen that is even remotely like Inception is the story ark. Some people may just simplify the film as James Bond mixed with matrix or a heist film mixed with dreams I think that just passing the film of like that is doing it and Nolan a great disservice. Although outside viewers may see this as just a sci-fi heist film it is much deeper, crazier and psychological then just a bond film with a twist. Although it starts off simple enough it soon delves deep into the dream worlds and at it becomes hard to keep up with if you don?t give the film your undivided attention. The first half of the film is a really well planned set-up and the second half delivers on everything it promises and then some. In my case I had two watch this film twice to really understand most of what was happening, which will undoubtedly divide viewers of the film. It?s good because it gives the viewer great reason to revisit the film over and over again. It can also be seen as bad as people would rather only have to view the film once and not have to be forced to revisit the film just to understand it.

Now as I write this review I haven?t read any other reviews of Inception that even slightly touch on the ending or any theories for the overall film, this is just my own theory after watching Inception(yes there will be spoilers). Honestly the first time I saw this film I thought it was actually very straightforward (except for the ending). However on my second viewing I began to theorize and contemplate until I came up with what I believe Inception is, the whole film is a dream. The whole film is edited in this way that makes everything dreamlike like the way most scenes seemingly start in the middle of a conversation or like you?re missing pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. Sometimes we completely miss the beginning of scene or conversation, which Cobb references when he starts teaching Ariadne (Ellen Page) about shared dreaming. ?You never really remember the beginning of a dream do you? You always wind up right in the middle of what?s going on???.. So how did we end up here?......... Think about it Ariadne, how did you get here? Where are you right now??. That one quote seems to really fit with the rest of the film, all the weird cuts and lack of human emotion or outside contact with the main characters seems so dream like. My theory is by no means a certain one and it?s the most logical one at the moment that I can think of, however what I am certain of is the ending of the film. The last five minutes of this film is so obviously dream-like that if Nolan had intended it no to be a dream he would have left the movie with some huge gapping flaws. The first hint is the actual fact that Cobb and Saito wake up not longer after the rest of the group even though it is implied by the withering old Saito that they?ve been down there for years (although strangely Cobb doesn?t age at all). The second clue is that it never actually shows Cobb and Saito going from each layer of the dream world to the ?real world?. The third hint is the actual way of escaping Limbo, although it?s never fully explained it?s implied that people can?t escape from Limbo and can spend decades there yet at the end of the film simply kicking the person wakes them up from Limbo? If that is true then why was all this emphasis on how bad and mind melting Limbo is? The final hint is not only the fact that Cobb?s totem is still impossibly spinning but also the fact that his children are the same age, in the same clothes, the same setting (and lighting for that matter) and position from the last time he saw them. To sum up my lengthy theory I think that Cobb is has always been stuck in Limbo and that he is just reliving all his memories in a infinite loop of dreams.

To FINALLY sum up Inception it truly is a thinking man?s masterpiece. Great visuals, amazing set pieces and mind bending twists. To fully understand the movie it will require countless re-viewings which will bring a lot of pleasure to sum and it will scare of others. Like I said before this movie isn?t for everyone but for the audience willing to let their minds be stretched in the world of Inception then prepare for a mind bending ride of your life.

Brazil (1985)
6 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes

It took me nearly a whole year to track down Terry Gilliam's maniacal take on 1984. Finally a week ago i found a copy at my local second hand dvd store, i was not the least bit disappointed after such a long wait. However it took me two views of this film to not only realise the the poignant satire but also the sheer brilliance that is Brazil (or 1984 and a half, which was one of the proposed names which makes a lot more sense at a title for this film then Brazil).

Sam Lowry (Jonathan Pryce) is a typical low-level government employee who is looking for a way out. His mother (Katherine Helmond) is pressuring him to pursue bigger ambitions while his boss Kurtzman (Ian Holm) who relies on Lowry's smarts is very keen on retaining his services. Lowry however has other ideas, he is constantly dreaming of himself as a superhero who must save his one true love (Kim Greist) from her captors. After a printing incident causes and average father to be accused and jailed for being falsely identified as Henry Buttle (Robert DeNiro) a rogue electrician fighting against the establishment, Sams department have been given the blame for falsely jailing (and the the eventual death) of the innocent man. After this incident deepens and Lowry finally accepts a job promotion he is soon entangled in a dangerous quest for the love of is life.

I have to admit that the first time watched this film i didn't enjoy it at all, i didn't get what all the hype was and i was very disappointed after all the hype for this movie. However i recently decided to re-watch this movie with an open mind and boy did my view on this movie change. To start of with i wasn't expecting Brazil to be a comedy first time around so i wasn't interpreting any of the well scripted satire i also didn't really understand the concept until the second time round either. Watching it a second time i was thoroughly entertained and cracked up by what in my opinion is Gilliam's best work. The satire in this film can be so black at times, then out of n where the film will throw some slapstick comedy a you which really gives you a nice break from the bleak and often dark world of Brazil. It really succeeds at being a dark but satirical film that i would rank up with Dr Strangelove (which also took me another view for me to understood just how genius is). What makes Brazil so memorable and timeless is the very well done cg. Although it may be obviously from the 80's never did it look like a obvious green screen and i could never tell what was fake or real, there are countless scenes that i find impossible to know for certain how they were done they were done to realistically.

Jonathan Pryce is not only likeable but also portrays Sam Lowry in a very realistic if not cliche way, which i think is even more relatable nowadays then it was back in the 80's. Although Sam's dream girl was a fairly attractive Lady(at least when she had a full head of hair, short hair just isn't my thing) she felt a little wooden, lacking in depth and very inconsistent. She just really didn't have any motivations and she falls in love with a man who she had hated only a couple of hours before. All the other supporting actors were also really used but what steals the show is the style of Brazil. From the stretched out faces of a cosmetic procedure, the silo sized interrogation room (more like castle) and even Sam's very oppressive closet sized office. It all just wreaks of Terry Gilliam. So much imagination has been put into the design of this movie, it's been so lovingly made by Terry Gilliam that aesthetically it's one of the best films i've ever had the pleasure of seeing.

The look and feel of this story however unfortunately over shadows the plot which although not horrible is a little plain and sloppy. Again what brings this film to life is Terry Gilliam's quirky direction and dialogue (which has a Monty python wit associated to it). He can be very subtle when he wants to then he can just go bat-shit insane, to be fair however he is a Python boy so what else could you expect? Terry Gilliam's control over this movie is so evident that near the end of the film it becomes a little too over the top and crazy, it throws subtlety out the window and starts hammering its point to the audience it looses the subtle humour and goes with a disappointing attempt at a 'confrontation' which seems very out of character, However minor these criticisms may seem they really were the only deterrent from giving this movie a perfect score, which saddens me even saying it.

It goes with out saying that this basically is a parody of 1984 hence the fact that Terry Gilliam initially wanted to name the film 1984 and a half. When i say parody you really have to take that statement with a grain of salt, Brazil is a parody in the same sense that Shaun of the Dead is spoof film (it is but it isn't) i'm not referring to parody on the scary movie scale (flat out copy).Terry Gilliam never disrespects the novel and he keeps most of the messages that the book is trying to convey only with a more satirical approach, Brazil stays away from 1984 enough for it to become it's own stand alone film yet it still acknowledges it's inspiration and pays at lot of respect to it a the same time. Maybe parody isn't the right word honestly this movie is a recreation of Orwell's dark vision by an absolute nut job with a very neon colour palette.

The best way to describe this film is 'inspired craziness', Terry Gilliam found a film subject that he had upmost respect for an loved and totally twisted it into this insane and satirical Orwell love letter. Just imagine if this film hadn't been filmed by Gilliam! To be fair it would just be 1984 i guess. To sum up this film really has the visual sense and storytelling to be a classic but the characters are a little too forgettable and the plot goes from very dull to mindbogglingly impossible. I guess that the word impossible isn't part of Gilliam's vocabulary and i for one hope that never changes.

Pulse (Kairo)
Pulse (Kairo) (2005)
7 years ago via Rotten Tomatoes

My reaction to this movie when the credits started to roll was "what the hell did i just watch...." it's now a day latter and all i can say is that i watched a movie that had no plot but was still damn scary. The best way to describe this movie is to say that it's a mix of Fear Dot Com and The Happening. That's right it's about the internet making people commit suicide, why am i not surprised this is a Jhorror film?

Now before i get into my review properly i thought just for shits and giggles i would just highlight some of the reasons why this film is so hilariously inept:

1. The story- Basically there is no story. The characters aren't set up at all, in fact i can't remember any of the main characters names. Throughout this film we follow two sets of characters as the 'disease'( i really don't know what to call it honestly) hits Japan, at first you know that their stories are going to intertwine but not only do they not but also the main storyline is abandoned thirty minutes before the end of the film. The 'disease' itself is also very confusing. There are three ways people are killed by the 'disease' firstly you can be driven insane by it and it then makes you commit suicide, it can just make you disappear into a black smear on the wall or it just makes you combust into millions of tiny little black pieces which just float around the room.

2. The audio- The audio pops in and out which not only does it really annoy you but it also really detaches you from the situation. There are scenes where one of the characters is meant to be all alone in this arcade yet all this stock pub noise can be heard in the background, the sound also pops in and out quite regularly throughout the scene.

3. Subtitles- I don't know whether this is just horrible dialogue or it is actually poor subtitles but i'm just going to guess that it's the subtitles. On several occasions one of the characters has said full sentences that are subtitled as the person saying 'yeah' or 'huh'.

4. Dialogue - I think i'm just going to have to use some quotes from the movie to prove my point such as when one of the main characters is consoling his friend from the fear of dying by telling her that "in ten years they'll event a drug that will make us live forever" not convinced yet? How about this line "i can't believe He is dead" which is answered by her always caring friend " get over it that was nearly two days ago now, live in the future". This film is full of this horrible dialogue .

5. Ridiculously silly stuff - Now to top all these problems is just these huge gapping plot holes in the movie. For example near the end of the film the two central characters are trying to escape the now deserted Japan, they happen to find this Ferrari speed boat that is tied up to a poll which is no where near a dock, also one of the characters just walks into the first house she thinks of and finds the keys to the boat right in front of her. Another big hole is when two characters try to get as far away from the deserted city as possible by going to the train station which is out of order yet they still somehow catch the train which must have a phantom driver or just someone so dedicated to their job that even the apocalypse doesn't stop them from doing their job.

You may notice that i don't call anyone by their own name, that's because i have no clue what their name is. The characters are just there to be terrorised and nothing else, their names are mentioned so rarely you just don't bother remembering after a while. Now after all these complaints you may think i hate this film, well i don't in fact i love it. This film is terrifying even though i have no clue what i'm getting scared at. What i do have to give huge credit to this film is for its refusal to stoop down to jump scares that have ruined plagued countless horrible Hollywood Horror films. The tension just builds and builds and i really was closing my eyes at points of the film. When people say that this movie doesn't use blood to scare they're not joking, there is no blood at all you see a woman shoot herself and another woman jump of a tower and you even see her smack on the ground and you hear the very heartwarming thud but not one single blood dropping!!!!!!!

This may possibly be the worst review i have ever done due to the fact that their is nothing to really review. The music is great and so is the suspense but their is no real co-hessive explanation to what was going on, the characters where basically rag dolls to push around this movie doesn't even bother following a script and to sum it all up you have no clue who these people are, whats going on or even why but you do how ever know that it is scary as hell. This is a movie i fully recommend, my review can't do any justice to this psychotic movie. I highly recommend this to anyone who loves film.