Something and nothing.

This is an odd movie, which now I see why it has all the mixed reviews.

The reason being, essentially, that what with all the day-glo / neon / fluorescence going on, and the premise, of a a load of assassins on the titular bullet train, you go into this expecting something along the lines of a whacky, coked up, high octane John Wick style movie, but it's actually more dialogue driven... for the first hour at least.

..."Witty" banter and lightly comedic dialogue, only punctuated by the odd smidge of "action".

This presents itself, and indeed, tries to be a kind of ultra-neon, modernist Guy Ritchie / Lock Stock etc. affair, set against a Keyser Söze (ripped off!) style unseen devil mythology, where someone is pulling the strings in the background.

These plot devices are pretty clunky and contrived, and the whole movie is basically absurd, whacky, and cartoonish... perhaps trying a little too hard to be cool, and too clever for it's own good (and too clever for it's own ability).

So if you expect an adrenalin rush straight out of the gate, you will be disappointed on that score, and see all the visual aspects as mere window dressing to cover up that fact.

(Half a dozen gratuitous cameos don't rescue it either, and don't really add anything, seeing as they have precisely no bearing on the plot whatsoever - just twenty second jobs for acting chums!)

That said, if you don't mind it not being what you thought it was, it is quite fun, goofy nonsense, albeit a wasted opportunity, I feel... a bit like those Shane Black movies I've seen recently: Nice Guys and Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang.

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Wow, just wow!

What a feast for the eyes and ears, this totally blew me away and the three-hour run-time passed in minutes. From the incredible opening scene to the heart-wrenching denouement, this had me enthralled.

The above could have been written for this or the original but it applies equally. However, it turned out I am not as familiar with the 50s version as I thought. The set pieces in this one were great but I couldn't mentally compare them with the other. The acting and singing, by all combatants (as that is what they are), are amazing.

Anyway, they stand alone, as far as I am concerned, as terrific moments in cinema. I hope it is as revered by people in the future as the first version is now!

10/10 :happy:

1 person found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

An old favourite that still keeps on rollin'!

Not seen this since I was about 12, when pretty much every year before that it seemed to be on tv, and I used to watch it every time... I thought it was great back then, but in the intervening years, if you'd asked me what the point of the whole movie was - the plot - I'd struggle to say anything more than a bunch of truckers decide to make a, well, convoy, and the cops don't like it.

(And that, upon rewatch, is still basically the plot :)

...However, since then, I now know who Sam Peckinpah is, and what he is known for as a director, including the overly highlighted violent scenes (occasional ultra slow-motion shots of a punch, or a shot, or other dramatic moment), and I get the whole metaphorical subtext etc.

But it still is fun, and very enjoyable, and sits alongside those kind of movies of the time like Any Which Way But Loose and Cannonball Run, being a kind of working class rebel outlaw movie in the style of a western set in a modern world.

It's sits tonally between Smokey And The Bandit, though not as goofy, and consistently light-hearted... And Vanishing Point, though not as serious and straight faced.

Not bad for a movie based on a song!

✔︎ Helpful Review?

One of the best Stephen King adaptations, and again, it probably has something to do with the director: Frank Darabont (Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile).

A pretty creepy and haunting analogy for human behaviour as a result of despair in the face of unknowable terror... Although the story was written some years back, the movie was doubtlessly produced to be timely in the wake of 911.

...Still, perhaps even more applicable than ever.

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Aaaarrghhh...Puberty!!!!!

Not anywhere near as good as the first, but that's because, I think, that one will have a broader appeal age wise, in evoking a lot of "stuff" for older audiences about their youngest years... In a more poetic, and heart-breaking way, whereas this will probably mean more to an audience specifically contemporary to the age of the lead character Riley.

This moves a lot quicker, and is more busy.

Very good though.

✔︎ Helpful Review?

This is really rather brilliant.

It's a short movie, running at only an hour and a half...

(A full two minutes of which, are occupied at the start by the seemingly endless production company idents... seriously, I think there's at least eight!)

...And it's a pastiche / homage to both the kind of late night seventies talk shows that felt a bit ropey, and a bit dodgy and dangerous, as well as the several attempts at live TV broadcasting of "spooky" goings on at Halloween over the years, where they pretend that it's all actually happening, but much to the consternation of those making the show, it actually is.

So it's a desperate gambit of a show gone wrong, framed as a kind of "found footage" horror, where we are supposedly witnessing the original master-tape of the original live broadcast...

...Except I think this has actually exceeded the now traditional, and perhaps worn trope of the found footage thing, and is perhaps better thought of as a kind of stage play.

In fact, my abiding thoughts at the end were exactly that: "This would make truly brilliant stage show!" - Broadway or West End adaptation anyone?!?

So fading talk show host invites a supposedly intermittently possessed girl on as a guest, with her rescuer / carer, in order to try and coax the devil out for the benefit of live TV (and therefore, good ratings), along with a now professional sceptic / debunker, and a psychic medium, all infront of a live television audience... what could go wrong? :)

It feels very stagey throughout the first half, but I think, done with a wry smile, albeit, played brilliantly deadpan... and I do think it might have been more effective without the "special" effects, later on, which feel a bit too "Ghostbusters" CGI, and does kill the immersion a little, but the finale really redeems it, with the "In The Mouth Of Madness" surreal, horrific mind bending sequence, which takes it up to another level of weird.

All cast are excellent, primarily David Dastmalchian, of course, who, finally given a chance at a lead role, knocks t clean out of the park, as we always knew he could, and it's nice to see Ian Bliss (Bane in: Matrix Reloaded) again - need to see more of this dude! - as the debunker, and especially praise goes to Ingrid Torelli as a truly creepy kid!

A great, short, late night horror watch, and as I said, an absolute potential gold mine for a possible stage play adaptation!

(Has anyone ever done a genuine horror movie on the stage before)

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Fun, un-pc modern Cheech and Chong-esque stoner comedy that eventually turns into a kind of slapstick Die Hard / videogame shooter style bonkers shoot-em up.

Really quite good actually.

✔︎ Helpful Review?

"Winter must be cold for those with no warm memories..."

Yup, it's that one... heavily, not only influencing, but in many ways informing, if not actively helping create Sleepless In Seattle - The whole: Empire State Building scenario and so forth.

But it's a pretty odd movie, as much as it is a classic romance movie, in that the first half is pretty tedious, and dull, not only due to the limited expressive capabilities of Cary Grant (better at the comic stuff than the dramatic I feel), but also the rather empty "banter" and back and forth between him and Deborah Kerr, who has quite a stiff, school-matronly thing going on here, which mostly feels flat, and not quite as crackling as they were perhaps aiming for... Not good in a dialogue driven, two person focused movie; Especially when the lack of musical score for much of this makes it seem like you're on set, without all the production added, so it seems odd. In addition, many of these individual shots go on way too long, making it feel all the more awkward, like they should have cut to something else several seconds previous.

(There'a one scene in a small chapel where they are both praying silently to themselves, where I'm not entirely sure if she's reciting a prayer to herself, or the whole bloody bible!).

All of this is not a good mix, and as well as highlighting the dull clunky feel of it all, is apt to make you nod off.

And from this alone, I would have scored this a 5 out of 10 (5 being my baseline score of: "meh" - less than this represents a negative score in my book)

...Oh, and their respective "others", whom they are in relationships with, seem to be taking they news that they each love another in an altogether nonchalant, bordering on indifferent manner, which does lessen the dramatic stakes considerably .

But...

...Then, something remarkable happens, as the last half hour picks it up a couple of points for me, and makes the whole thing more worthy of it's "Classic" status... And better than this, the final five minutes (literally the last five minutes) are truly exceptional, even brilliant.

That final scene is probably one of the most inspired, and brilliant pieces of screenwriting in any romance movie, using the genius device of having him apologise to her for something she (apparently) has done to him, until she gets the point and the subtext is apparent to all of us in the audience. Masterfully done.

So this last scene is probably a 9 out of 10 (pushing towards a 10) and redeems the whole thing somewhat, and is worth watching for that alone.

One odd little thing that stuck in my head after the movie was over, was that it occurred to me that they meet on a boat when kerr's character finds his lost cigarette case....I'm pretty sure he doesn't smoke a single cigarette in the whole movie!

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Independent review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Independent review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Independent review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Independent review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Independent review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Independent review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Independent review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Independent review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Independent review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Guardian review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Guardian review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Guardian review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Independent review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Great lawyer turns sleuth in defence of his client movie, culminating in a courtroom drama, set against a noir-ish intrigue / corruption background setting, with a dash of Silence Of The Lambs about it.

...It's great, until the credits roll, and you start thinking about the plausibility of it, and what comes after (and even before), and it breaks down a little under too much scrutiny.

So my advice is: Don't nit-pick, or try to consider the whys and wherefores, just sit back and go along for the ride, and then it's a great movie.

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Independent review :read:

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Entertaining twaddle with plot holes you can drive a ship through. Violent and sweary. Right up my street! 8/10

✔︎ Helpful Review?

The man who almost wasn't there.

This is what I am looking to find when I buy a stack of DVDs... a little lost gem, a real treasure of a movie, which this absolutely is!

This is one of those from the noughties which has that quirky, slightly off kilter humour redolent of an indie flick.

It is in tone, and feel, a lot like Lost In Translation: total understatement, and under-playing, for maximum effect, which, though the name of this movie has come in and out of my consciousness on and off throughout the years, it was the involvement of Zach Braff that always put me off, due to his character in (of course) Scrubs... I didn't think he was capable of such a brilliantly subdued, even supressed performance as he gives here, let alone, that he could both write and direct such a minor masterpiece as this, which he has.

He takes the lead as a minor struggling actor returning home for the funeral of his mother, amidst unresolved issues between them as well as his father, which is what set him to going away in the first place, and he has, over the intervening years, become so overly medicated in order to deal with the presumed psychological impact them, that he is numb to the point of blankness.

While at his Mother's funeral, for which he can feel little, to no emotion, much less express any, he meets up with some old school friends who now have jobs digging the graves, they invite him out to a party, and being barely a participant in his own life, just goes along with it. He also comes across the rather oddball, delightfully naïve, yet open and friendly Natalie Portman, and so his journey back to the land of the living, and to being a fully functioning human begins.

While the relationship with Portman's character does for the main part, class this as a rom-com, it's actually more of a tragi-comedy focused more on Braff's character, and his route back to being someone.

The comedy is light, witty and perfectly judged, the tragic elements equally light and well judged, and this is overall a wonderfully warm film, that gets warmer as it goes, and even becomes, at times sublime, and even beautiful.

So if you like the "vibe" of Lost In Translation, and wished there was at least another movie, near identical in tone and humour, that make you feel that same way, then here it is.

On the strength of this, give Zach Braff all the money he can carry, and let him go make more of the same!

Brilliant.

(I'm keeping this DVD!)

1 person found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

The first of my Christmas movies.

...For I have now promoted this to it's proper place as a Christmas movie, not just a rom-com, and in fact, it foes that same thing that Moonstruck does for the summer: It's not just a two person rom-com, it's as much, if not more a family rom-com, in the sense that it is a family romance, about a lonely train ticket booth worker who falls in love with the man she saves from the tracks one day, but, being in a coma, he is unable to clarify things for his family, who visit him in hospital, about the fact that she is a total stranger to him, and so they mistake her for his fiancé, and the rest of the movie is about her being welcomed into their family, and she falling in love with the family vibes.

Very warm, cosy Christmas themed farcical gem that gets better every year, and so it is the first one I watch in the season.

(And it has Sandra Bullock.... :)

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Big stupid fun!

I really enjoyed this piece of polished, B-movie, creature feature nonsense... I think, because, as with the likes of Sharknado etc. I couldn't be disappointed, as I knew what I was going to get going in: It ain't Shakespeare, and it is not trying to be so, and you feel everyone involved is entirely aware if just what it is they are making... very self aware, and unapologetically so.

To sum up:

It's Jurassic Park, grafted onto The Abyss, doing a "mega" riff on the obvious inspiration of Jaws.

(Jurassic Shark?:)

Billionarie bonehead funds deep see exploration into an Abyssal trench, beyond the apparent sea floor, discovers massive shark-a-lodon thing, that then follows them to the surface, and commences eating everyone and everything in sight.

Only uber-gruff stereotypically chiselled and troubled hard-man Jason Statham can save the day!

(The movie itself is his saving grace here, as for once, he's not taking himself too seriously)

There are pretty much all of the key scenes / beats from Jaws played out here, but overtly so, and not pretending it's thought of these ideas itself, and oddly, given the carnage going on, there's actually not much gore in this, thanks to the judicious use of the timely spray of water, or a plume of bubbles at the most timely of moments, that obscures the majority of the blood and horror, and so like any good horror movie, allows the audience to imagine what would otherwise have been seen.

It took care of my Saturday night's entertainment, with a light piece of hokum fluff, that I didn't have to think too much about, but could just sit back, relax, and be very amused with a nice ale and some dry roasted peanuts.

✔︎ Helpful Review?

I concur with Dr D. on this one.

...It's fun, but if played straight, and all the zany, wackiness and random - out-of nowhere-for no-reason-plot-elements etc. were ditched , this could have been an all time great, set alongside the likes of L.A. Confidential, Chinatown, and the like.

(Having seen Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang a while back, it's seems this confirms what I wrote in my review of that movie, about Shane Black: He seems obsessed with those two movies, but doesn't have the courage to play it straight up, and feels compelled to drench it in wry humour, and make jokes all the time because he feels he needs to apologise for himself... You feel like these two movies, more earnestly treated, could have been dripping with Oscars!)

The obsession of his with L.A Confidential is more all but confirmed here, due to the presence of both Russell Crowe and Kim Basinger.

This is, however, more even, and coherent than Kiss Kiss, and does have a couple of genuine laugh out loud moments, but is mostly, at best, mildly amusing, and only light fun... and altogether a wasted opportunity to do a brilliant, retelling of a seventies set L.A. Confidential.

✔︎ Helpful Review?

Player one was born ready!

I finally gave in, and ordered this DVD from Amazon, as it never turns up on telly, and for some reason, is really rare on DVD here in UK...

(A recent Blu-ray / 4k seems to be available, but the DVD editions are pretty hard to come by, and are slightly elevated in price)

...And it's odd, as it seems to be one of those movies who's impression that it made on memory is much greater than how good the movie actually is, watching all these years later.

This is mostly I think, due to a couple of factors: Firstly, being of it's time, and like near contemporary movie: Tron, was way ahead in terms of visual effects for that era, and like Tron, tapped into the early arcade game culture which would massively appealed to us kids at the time. Secondly, the sweeping, majestic, and truly memorable score, which complements the aesthetic presentation, is very reminiscent of a kind of John Williams / Indiana Jones (possibly Superman too) adventure style, giving it a real sense of grandeur and scale.

But... strip away these factors, this tale of a kind of Superman in reverse - where Alex Rogan, a normal smalltown kid from a trailer park at the ass end of nowhere, is recruited via an arcade machine which tests his abilities to pilot a Stargun starfighter, and is whisked off to fight an alien scourge an save the universe in the depths of the Galaxy - is actually a lot thinner than I remember, with only a couple real space combat scenes, and the alien scourge is not so numerous or intimidating as all that. Switching back and forth between his recruitment and engagement with the good aliens, and his trailer park family and friends, where a robot body double has been left to cover for him, this isn't as epic as the music etc. would suggest.

Not that it isn't great fun, and is still a very good film, worthy of the cult-classic status it has attained in the intervening years... I just see now how the presentation does a lot to cover it's short-comings, and leave a bigger footprint that the foot alone can make.

The effects, as viewed form this distance of time, are oddly, and paradoxically, simultaneously painfully dated and stunningly impressive, even now... the computer generated modelling: The shapes and geometry of the images are still incredible, on occasion, making even newer CGI look a little shonky in this regard, not to mention the tracking and movement through space, as the virtual camera see these objects, is truly astounding... but the surface rendering - absence of textures, reflections, and other window dressing is sorely lacking, and shows the severe limitations of the time (There's only e few such rendered objects on screen at any one time too)...

...But, fortunately, using my pre-millennial upbringing, I am able to use that estimable faculty of the "Imagination", so that mind can envision what the eye can't necessarily, literally see, by what is merely suggested by what is actually shown, so I can forgive these dated effects.

Still great fun though.

3 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?

Rewatched, finally, after several years... sometimes through my fingers!

I was all about this movie back in the day, but this must have been on the cusp of my coming to know what a good movie looked like...

...I always knew this was one to file under: "So bad it's good", but now I see it's so bad it's... yeah, still pretty bad, in retrospect.

It has a great central premise, that still captures my imagination: Demonic witch-man Julian Sands, captured by witch hunter Richard E. Grant (Dressed and performing as a Scottish caveman, for reasons best known to himself :) back in the 17th century, before Sands is swept up by some sorcerous jiggery-pokery, and swept forward in time to the 1980's, along with Grant, where they will do battle anew in the future... Grant trying to stop Sands getting all three parts of the devil's bible in order to unmake creation.

...Taking up, and Tagging along with grant is Lori Singer who has an ageing hex put on her, which only catching up with Sands' witch-man will fix.

But let's be frank... the effects, especially after all these years, are... yikes!

There's some pretty wonky acting on occasion, and a heap of convenient plot devices and happenings, but... the two leads are pretty great, in a hammy way, what with perhaps Sands' most iconic role, and Lori Singer is actually rather good at the deadpan comic delivery, and has some real zingers here and there...

(Why did she not do more of this in her career? She has a bit of a talent for it!)

...And overall, still a sterling piece of campy, hammy, cult-classic nonsense, that remains entertaining.

(Perhaps , though, not as entertaining as I remembered it.)

[Note: A reasonably hard one to find on DVD, this original movie, but I've noticed of late, Film4 in the UK is sneaking the odd cult movie in the dead of night, at the end of the schedule, where I got to see this one again from... so keep your eyes peeled to the listings here for some gems you might be struggling to get on disc!]

3 people found this review helpful.   ✔︎ Helpful Review?