Creature from the Haunted Sea (1961) review

(3/10)

     Creature from the Haunted Sea is one of the most infamously terrible horror movies with terrible performances, an indecisive plot and style, cheesy special effects and a lack of screentime for the so-called monster. The movie tries to parody so many different styles that it only ends up parodying itself in a mess that's so bad it's borderline hilarious.

PLOT: During a time where Cuba is in political turmoil, criminal Renzo Capetto (Anthony Carbone) makes a deal to transport a group of Cuban exiles out of the country while also taking some of the country's national treasure. Capetto plots while on the boat with American ex-agent Sparks Moran (Edward Wain) to kill the exiles and blame it on an apparent sea monster so he can keep all of the money for himself. However, things begin to go awry when a real sea monster shows up and starts terrorizing the crew. Capetto must escape the sea monster to get away with the riches and the girls he wants. The plot is a hot mess with abundant unnecessary twists and turns. It seems to focus too much on the comedy relief and attempts at satire and not enough on the horror aspect of the movie. So many characters, situations, and quirks were just random and un-called for making the plot of this movie an unbalanced and substantially dead mess.

ACTING: The performances in this movie were very amateur at best. None of the actors or actresses truly stood out or showed any real emotion. In fact, it becomes hilariously evident about halfway through the movie that even the actors have given up. It's like they knew the movie was terrible and just didn't want to even put effort into it anymore. These performances are the equivalent of grabbing some random people off the street and offering pay.

SCORE: The score in here was very quirky and unfitting for most of what this movie intended to be. The music in no way matches the mood of a super-spy flick or a horror movie.

EFFECTS/ANIMATION: The special effects for the creature were very cheesy at best, making the monster appear clearly fake and apparently thrown together. As terrifically cheesy as the monster's costume effects are, his appearance is somehow one of the most widely known of early black-and-white horror films. Maybe Creature from the Haunted Sea is just notorious for being cheesy and bad? In addition to the creature effects, there were some unnecessary animations at the beginning of the movie. They served no purpose, changed the whole tone of the movie, and mislead the viewer in many ways, from under-exaggerating the monster and over-exaggerating the action and comedy. One can start a pure comedy, family movie, or children's movie with light-hearted animations in the title credits, but a horror film? It just doesn't sound reasonable.

OTHER CONTENT: Creature from the Haunted Sea seemed to just not know what it wanted to be. As it begins, the audience is led to believe it's going to be a super-spy satire complete with laughs for all. As it progress, however, it seems to wander into the territory of goofy Gilligan's Island-style comedy and doesn't really touch upon the horror genre or the whole "creature" part until near the very end. Even if it did want to be a comedy or a satire, it should have focused only on that aspect and not try to take the movie in a dozen different directions. Cheesy horror genius Roger Corman has made some ridiculous cinema, but this one seems to be the most brainless and underdeveloped. The movie surely would have been much better had the makers scrapped most of the additional characters and plot twists and added more production value and maybe even more screentime for the monster which bears the movie's name.

     Roger Corman's Creature from the Haunted Sea is widely recognized among classic horror fans throughout the world, but in all reality one of the most terrible and cheesy ones the decade has to offer. The plot has too many unnecessary twists and can't choose which genre it really wants to follow, the special effects are cheesy to iconic excess, and the acting is hollow and ridiculously untalented. Save your time on something much funnier or much spookier, like an actual satire or an actual horror film.

Vacation (2015) review

(4/10)

     Some things in life just can't be replicated, as proven by the lackluster, Vacation. The movie fails at all of the standards Chevy Chase and his original crew set back in the glory days. The jokes are more generic, crude, and unfunny with little cleverness to them compared to what could've been. However, the movie didn't completely miss its mark, with a few one-liners, cameos, and perfromances that prevented it from downright sinking.

PLOT: Rusty Griswold (Ed Helms) is all grown up with a wife named Debbie (Christina Applegate) and two children. One day, due to the apparent family's falling apart, Rusty decides to take his family on the age-old trip to Wally World, though no one really wants to go. Regardless, the family packs up in a foreign rent-a-car and begins the worst yet most eventful road trip they'll ever have. Along the way, the family comes runs into many obstacles including old sorority games, a "hot spring", and an intimidating trucker tracking them the whole way as well as many other comedic misfortunes. Through this road trip, Rusty helps to restore the family's happiness as well as his dying love life with his wife. The plot is the same as the fist National Lampoon's Vacation but executed with a less creative and less clever way. The twists and turns are just as crazy, but not nearly as funny or original in comparison with most raunchy comedies of the modern age.

ACTING: The performances at heart weren't too bad. The lousy writing is what made them seem sour. Ed Helms actually does a pretty great job as Rusty Griswold, giving it his all to channel his inner Clark Griswold. Helms tries but is let down by a bad screenplay. Same goes for most of the actors. However, one additional aspect that helped save the movie was the brief cameo appearances by Chevy Chase and Beverly D'Angelo reprising their classic roles as Clark and Ellen Griswold. They didn't completely save the movie, but they made it a little less low quality.

SCORE/SOUNDTRACK: There's nothing too special about the score or the soundtrack, which consists mostly of pop and rap songs with a few different covers of the National Lampoon's Vacation, "Holiday Road."

OTHER CONTENT: This movie was just a cheap attempt at re-capturing and re-vamping movie magic of the past. The Vacation movies were great in their time, instilling clever laughs into each themed vacation. This addition is the exception, as expressed even by the intentional fourth wall break near the beginning. This movie is supposed to be treated as its own entity, and that's what made it truly fail. Everyone goes in expecting a new Vacation adventure but instead gets another raunchy comedy with gross humor and more mature jokes. The movie does have its occasional one-liners that inspire a chuckle or two, but for the most part, the movie is a crude and generic mess trying to take the place of something more clever. It's not bringing honor to the franchise, just changes that no true fan wanted. It's all hit-or-miss at best.

     The new Vacation is anything but a break from the norm. The jokes are adapted to a more modern audience and the majority fail due to over-raunchiness and bad screenplay writing. The movie tries to retain its name by replacing old traditions with new events but fails to do anything but sink into the predictable field of modern comedy. So much acting and story potential is just squandered, as way more could have been done. I guess some people just don't get the point when told to leave something like this alone. Its time is now clearly passed.

A Nightmare On Elm Street 5: The Dream Child (1989) review

(3/10)

   This is perhaps the strangest and weirdest addition to the famous horror franchise. A Nightmare On Elm Street 5: The Dream Child is a mix of hit-and-miss performances, terrible effects, and a weird, overly-cheesy tone. It was as if the filmmakers decided to make a fan film rather than an actual installment.

PLOT: Alice (Lisa Wilcox) has been living her life peacefully with a loving boyfriend, Dan (Danny Hassel), and also has a baby on the way. Until recently, notorious nightmare-killer, Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund) had been destroyed and cut off from the real world. However, Krueger eventually finds a new way, using her baby's dreams to access the real world and kill more teenagers. Even worse, Krueger is "feeding" these souls to Alice's baby in the womb, brainwashing him to be Krueger's apprentice. Krueger has a more obvious weak spot this time, as he's afraid of his mother, Sister Amanda Krueger (Beatrice Boepple), who appears in the nightmares as well. Sister Krueger wants to capture her son back and keep him from killing anyone else. Somehow, Alice has to get Krueger away from her kid and quite possibly in the hands of Sister Krueger. The plot in itself is preposterous and executed in an illegible, illogical (at least in terms of the series) way. I'm starting to think the series should have ended with the previous installment. Because of this execution, nothing can even be taken seriously, for one would just laugh and queston how any of this makes any sense at all.

ACTING: The performances in this strange installment were mainly hit-and-miss, with Englund and Wilcox being the lead performances. They both did decent job, but in truth, all performances were rather messed up due to an awkward, unfunny script. Most people laughed at Krueger's cheesy kill jokes in the previous movies; however, the script is so bad in this addition that Krueger's lines couldn't even inspire a chuckle. A couple of other performances were decent, including Nick Mele as Dennis Johnson and Danny Hassel as Dan. They weren't exceptional, but definitely tolerable.

SCORE: The score in this one is way over-dramatic and unnecessary. It makes the movie feel like it's taking itself way too serious.

EFFECTS: The special effects in this movie, for the most part, were complete garbage. Everything looked goofy, fake, and just plain embarrassing for any horror movie in general to have. The only effects that were fairly decent would be the few claymation and digital effects. They were cool, but buried beneath the stinking heap of effects preceded by them. If you laugh at anything in this movie, laugh at how bad the effects are.

OTHER CONTENT: Nightmare On Elm Street 5: The Dream Child is just a strange, unnecessary installment to a franchise that would have been better left alone. Everything feels weird, preposterous, and exhausted, as no variety is added to the franchise. If Krueger even fails to satisfy, the movie shouldn't have existed. The only emotions one could leave this movie with are embarrassment and confusion, for that's what this attempt at a horror movie is: a confusing embarrassment.

   A Nightmare On Elm Street 5: The Dream Child should not exist. There was no reason to make the movie except the possibility of making money off of trash. Terrible script, goofy special effects, and a preposterous plot pull this movie down to the bottom of the barrel. I suggest if anyone's a Freddy fan, skip this installment. None of it is even necessary.

A Nightmare On Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge (1985) review

(3/10)

   Compared to its legendary predecessor, the first sequel to Wes Craven's memorable franchise is quite terrible. Everything is a major fall from the first film. Most of the performances are very hollow and inexperienced, the mechanics of the movie are very ridiculous, and instead of scares, we have unintentional laughs. In comparison to the first, A Nightmare On Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge falls into so-bad-it's-good territory, and is in no way a worthy addition to Craven's horror canon.

PLOT: After his family moves into the old house on Elm Street, young and awkward Jesse Walsh (Mark Patton) starts to have terrifying dreams of former serial killer, Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund). Even more terrifying than that is the fact that Freddy wants to recruit Jesse as a type of apprentice. Though Jesse doesn't want anything to do with it, he finds out over time that he can't control his decision to kill, for Freddy's begun to control him. With only the support of his best friend, Ron Grady (Robert Russler) and his girlfriend, Lisa Webber (Kim Myers), Jesse must fight his urge to kill and get rid of Freddy for good. The plot sounds like a good idea, but ends up just being preposterous. There's no boundaries between dreams and real life in this Krueger movie; Freddy attacks and effects the scenery almost everywhere, not limiting to dreams anymore. This throws off the whole concept of the movie and pretty much ruins the movie and makes it confusing. The plot is overly ridiculous and preposterously executed.

ACTING: The performances were not so great in this Freddy "film". The only performance that showed a spark of effort was, of course, Robert Englund as Freddy Krueger. Englund stays true to the attitude of his character. No one else in this movie even showed a hint of experience. Mark Patton is almost completely unfitting for the part of Jesse and Kim Myers is actually as wooden as a tree. Had this cast had a bit of experience, this movie may have had a bit more potential.

SCORE: The score is really nothing special and fantastic in this one. It enhanced the few moments of unease, but it wasn't anything truly significant.

EFFECTS: The effects in this Nightmare movie are hit and miss with most being misses. The strange part is that the effects in the movie seemed to slowly deteriorate from decent to terrible and cheap. The blood is still true, but the means of killing and the more grotesque scenes are just plain cheap. It feels like they squandered every dollar they had on everything else, unsuccessfully, and settled for cheap props and visual effects.

OTHER CONTENT: The only good things about this sad attempt at accompanying a classic are the hilarious one-liners and the unintentional humor. This movie is funny in places it shouldn't be. It takes itself too seriously for what it really is, which is a simple attempt at milking a franchise too early. However, the actually funny one-liners help save the movie from sinking into complete stupidity. In every other aspect, however, this movie fails. Had Craven been in the director's chair this round, Nightmare 2: Freddy's Revenge would have been an excellent addition to the franchise.

   Nightmare On Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge falls far from the original classic its concept came from. Except for Englund, none of the performances were worth anybody's time. The special effects aren't so special and the main idea is shattered in a preposterous change in plot mechanics. This whole movie is a horror experiment gone wrong. As a matter of fact, I'd call it the true "nightmare" after falling so far from the classic predecessor's quailty.

Dark Shadows (2012) review

(7/10)

   Tim Burton and Johnny Depp team up once again to bring us a movie with just enough gothic charm and dramatic twists to keep it afloat, though very derivative of Burton's past works. Though effective in entertaining the masses, Dark Shadows proves to be one of Burton's weakest films.

PLOT: Barnabus Collins (Johnny Depp) was once the child of a very wealthy family, whom the town of Collinsport is named after. Things are going very well for Barnabus until he decides to break the heart of Angelique Bouchard (Eva Green), an evil witch who curses his family with bad luck throughout the rest of their lives. Not only does Angelique curse the entire family, but she also hypnotizes Barnabus' current lover off a cliff and turns Barnabus into a vampire, cursed to live forever locked in a coffin underground. Many years down the road, in the early 1970s, the Collins family is still living, led by Elizabeth (Michelle Pfieffer) and Roger Collins (Jonny Lee Miller), but they are definitely not as rich as they used to be. Their son, David (Gully McGrath), is being "helped" by alcoholic psychiatrist, Dr. Julia Hoffman (Helena Bonham Carter), and their daughter Carolyn (Chloe Grace Moretz) is very strange. Things get even stranger for the family when Barnabus is dug up by accident and released to walk the Earth again. Barnabus has plans to restore his family honor, though he becomes distracted by the still-living witch plotting his downfall and the Collins' family aide, Victoria Winters (Bella Heathcote), who greatly resembles the woman the witch hypnotized off the cliff that fateful day. The plot is somewhat basic, but executed excellently. The amount of dramatic twists this movie takes isn't phenomenal, but it accumulates enough to save this movie from having a kind of "hollow" plotline. Without the twists, we'd just have a backstory with no more excitement.

ACTING: The performances in this movie are all very brilliantly done. Johnny Depp plays a fantastic part as the gothic Barnabus Collins. Helena Bonham Carter and Eva Green complimented his character well with their performances as Dr. Hoffman and the witch, Angelique. Other fantastic performances came from Chloe Grace Moretz as Carolyn, Bella Heathcote as Victoria Winters, Jackie Earle Haley as housekeeper Mr. Loomis, the late great Christopher Lee as Clarney, and of course, the cameo of shock-rocker Alice Cooper. Each performance only enhanced the gothic and dramatic tone of the movie.

SCORE: The score and soundtrack in this movie are both amazing. Though familiar, the great Danny Elfman conducts an excellent score for the movie. The soundtrack includes classics from artists such as The Moody Blues, Donovan, and, of course, Alice Cooper. Each compliments its own scene accurately.

EFFECTS: The special effects, though flashy, are effective and well done. The effects of Angelique's injuries, the ghost in the manor, the werewolf near the end, and Barnabus himself were probably the most unique and well detailed.

OTHER CONTENT: Dark Shadows isn't a bad movie by far. It's entertaining, bearing an all-star cast, a killer soundtrack, and supple dramatic elements. However, this is probably the movie Tim Burton put his least effort into. Unlike Burton's other works, Dark Shadows misses out on an inner meaning or purpose, rather than to just entertain the masses. However, much like Burton's other works, Dark Shadows tries to convey a sort of realism through a unique, dynamic character. This movie fails at that as it does nothing to convey a true meaning.

   Dark Shadows is like a poor man's Edward Scissorhands; it uses some of the same story elements, such as the dynamic character in a surreal environment, but it fails in conveying a true meaning like Burton's past works. Though led by a superb cast, classic soundtrack, and well-executed plot twists, Dark Shadows feels more like a shot at making money by entertaining the masses. The movie is entertaining, but contains little true substance or significance.

Godzilla's Revenge (1971) review

(3/10)

   As with most older Godzilla movies, this addition to the franchise is not to be taken seriously. The plot twists, voice dubs, and overall motion of the movie is cheesy and laughably bad. However, with the older Godzilla movies, that is only to be expected. The traditional monster effects and monster fights were pretty entertaining to watch at the least.

PLOT: Young schoolboy Ichiro (Tomonori Yazaki) has been dealing with a couple pressing struggles in his school life, such as his parents always being busy and bullies teasing him on his way home from school. Ichiro also idolizes the monsters on Monster Island, including the great Godzilla. After a rough day at school, Ichiro takes a nap in his older friend's, toymaker Inami (Eisei Amamoto), office. While asleep, Ichiro fantasizes himself on Monster Island seeing the many monsters fight each other. He also meets in his dream Godzilla's son, Minilla, who is also dealing with bully troubles from the other monsters and he can't quite get brave enough to face them. Ichiro has these dreams constantly, encouraging him to be brave, and with the local bank robberies going on, that may be just what he needs to avoid danger. The plot is very juvenile, but if done right, might have been fun to work with. However, the execution of the plot was very poor, with awkward dialogue, the traditional, over-dramatized fight scenes, and unnecessary plot twists that make very little sense. Something could have been made out of this, but instead, it leaves its entertainment factor up to laughter.

ACTING: The performances in this movie, both physical performances and the voice dubs, were quite terrible. With unrealistic motions, unfitting voice dubs, and annoying performing vocals, the performances literally create the stereotype of the old Godzilla movies to be off-sync. There was no saving this section of the movie.

SCORE: The score, though unfitting, was actually quite nostalgic. It gave one the feeling of watching an old monster movie, which this was. I didn't have too much of a problem with the soundtrack/score.

EFFECTS: The special effects were cheesy, as usual, but not too awful. If you like Godzilla and its lore, then it would be satisfying to see all of the many monsters, no matter how unrealistic or cheesy the costumes may look. I thought the all of the monster effects were actually pretty good except for the costume for Minilla. Godzilla's son should have looked more threatening and a little less like a worn-out Barney costume. If Minilla wouldn't have been so lazily done, I would be completely satisfied with the visual effects category.

OTHER CONTENT: Everything about this movie proved that the generic Godzilla movie has bad voice-overs and cheap costumes. However, the one thing that inspired a bit of pure entertainment value from this movie was the many monster fights not including Minilla. It's always fun to watch Godzilla beating up another clueless monster, usually brutally to a pulp. This movie is laughably bad and fun to watch only as ridicule. If you're a die-hard Godzilla fan, maybe this movie would fit you. Otherwise, prepare for a terrible treat.

   Most Godzilla movies are cheesy and only entertaining for a laugh. This movie is no exception. Awkward, juvenile and cheesy are just a few words to describe the feel of this movie. Though pretty terrible, I would rewatch this movie just to laugh or to mindlessly drool over the Godzilla fight scenes. My only source of real hate in this movie: Minilla.

Star Wars II: Attack of the Clones (2002) review

(5/10)

Most fans see this as a major improvement over its predecessor. However, this addition to the franchise happens to be my least favorite. The acting is bland for the first half of the movie, the script's an awful letdown, and a lot of the movie just feels lazy. However, when the love story, character studies, and epic battles start to kick in, the movie picks up with a near saving grace.

PLOT:After an attempt to assassinate Senator Padme Amidala (Natalie Portman), Obi-Wan Kenobi (Ewan McGregor) and the now-grown Anakin Skywalker (Hayden Christensen) are assigned on a mission to guard her from any further disruption. However, Skywalker's rebellious attitude toward life brings the two into a hunt for the potential killer, believed to be a bounty hunter named Jango Fett (Temuera Morrison). In the search, Anakin takes Padme back to her home planet of Naboo for refuge, and Obi-Wan investigates the mystery planet of Kamino, where an unauthorized clone army is being made in the Jedis' favor. Within the investigation, Obi-Wan becomes captured by the evil Count Dooku (Christopher Lee) and finds out about his plans for the dark side. Also, Anakin and Padme start falling in love with each other: something forbidden to the Jedi way. With the making of a clone army, the capture of Obi-Wan, and the young rebellion in Anakin's heart, it is evident the clone wars are about to start and the fate of the Jedi is locked in. It's a great plot executed decently.



ACTING:The acting in here is pretty okay. For the first half of the movie, I felt the acting was lazily done. I felt like the actors weren't really feeling their performances until about halfway through the movie. Ewan McGregor and Hayden Christensen didn't pick up their performances as Obi-Wan Kenobi and Anakin Skywalker for a little bit. Most of the actors appeared this way, but when they really got into their roles, the performances turned out excellent. Some of the best performances in this movie would have to be from Natalie Portman as Padme, Samuel L. Jackson as Mace Windu, Frank Oz as Yoda, Christopher Lee as Count Dooku, Pernilla August as Shmi Skywalker, and Ian McDiarmid as Chancellor Palpatine. After the acting picked up, the performances became pretty well done.

SCORE:The score in this Star Wars, still composed by John Williams, is mainly composed of borrowed themes with the exception of a few new and unique themes. The score was pretty alright in this one.

EFFECTS:The effects in this Star Wars have to be some of the best yet. The effects of the great battles between the droids and the clones as well as the details put into the several new and different aliens, such as the Geonosians and the Kaminoans, were brilliantly done. I was really impressed with the effects in this Star Wars.



OTHER CONTENT:This Star Wars movie just seemed to be a great letdown to me. There were many good moments to it, however. The battle scenes, love story, and character study of Anakin really brought the movie together. The battle contains roaring, exciting action, the love story is excellently detailed, and the character study of Skywalker's dark heart is a key part in the overall story with most of the emotion emanating from it. Besides the acting problem, the script was a major kill point for me. The script at a lot of the parts in the movie just seemed too silly, especially the banter between C-3PO and R2-D2 on Geonosis. The script just ruined a lot of the movie for me, as did the lazy feeling of the first half of the movie. The first half of the movie feels lazily done. From the beginning up to either Anakin's search for his mother or the execution on Geonosis seemed fairly lazy. The effects there seemed not as creative, and the acting at that moment seemed to follow. Also, the movie feels very derivative at some points where you can tell they borrowed another movie's cliche. I'm sure most fans of the franchise will disagree with me on all of these points, but I can't help feeling this movie was just pretty out of it for the most part.

OVERALL,a neutral-feeling movie with a great plot, slow-to-pick-up performances, alright score, exciting action, detailed love story, and a key character study drawing the story together, however, the script was ridiculous for the most part, the first half of the movie felt underdone, and several cliches in here felt familiar.

Tool: Toology - Unauthorized Biography (2001) review

(4/10)

This independent documentary on Tool is very cheaply made and almost a sad attempt to make a documentary, had it not included real interviews with close friends and more side information I didn't know.

SUBJECT:This documentary covers the subject of the unique hard rock band, Tool, with brief information on their early start and rise to fame, with lawsuits and all, leading up to the release of Lateralus. The documentary includes interviews from a member of the band, some fans, and a few close friends of the band. I believe they covered the subject almost decently. Had it not been made so brief and soon, they could have covered more ground. It also would have helped if they had gotten interviews from more than just one member of the band and more reliable people.

PEOPLE:As I just said, the people they interviewed didn't seem to be the most reliable and knowledgeable sources they could have found. A couple of them seemed to really know what they were talking about, but the rest seemed to be as general as anybody else. Another problem I had is only one member of the band was interviewed. It would have been nice to have seen an interview with Maynard himself or another member of the band.

SCORE:The score is actually lacking Tool's music, due to copyright issues. This is an extremely indie documentary, so they couldn't put any of Tool's music in it, so they used some cheap filler rock and guitar with annoying sound. I know they couldn't use Tool, but I think they could have done at least a little better than that.

EFFECTS:Since they didn't have the license to use Tool's music, the creators also didn't have the license to use their videos. Instead, the director decided to make his own, cheap claymation videos that didn't even look close to Tool but disturbingly unintelligent and nonsensical. It looked more like an old Nine Inch Nails video than a Tool video. It also made me mad that the creators tried to make the viewer infer that was an actual Tool video.

OTHER CONTENT:This documentary was way too cheaply made and behind its time. If the creators had made this documentary later in the future, gotten the right licensing to make it, and made it longer, this documentary wouldn't have been just wasted potential. There were some good points covered in this documentary, but for the most part, it seemed too independent and student-led.

OVERALL,a mediocre documentary with an almost decent topic discussion, unreliable sources, lacking and annoying score, cheap and inaccurate claymation, a too-early start, lack of correct licensing, and a lacking duration, but it covered a few good points, included some interviews by close friends, and added some information I actually didn't know.

*APOLOGY FOR LACK OF PICTURES, AS THERE WERE NONE TO BE FOUND*

Army of Darkness (1993) review

(6/10)

This second sequel to the Evil Dead series was much goofier and lazily done in my opinion. It only keeps about half of the scary-funny spirit that the previous two had, but keeps its random mood where anything can happen. 'Army' is still a campy treat.

PLOT:Ash (Bruce Campbell), top employee of S-mart, and his car are sent back in time to the middle ages due to the evil powers of the Necronomicon, or Book of the Dead. The locals think he's of the rival castle until he proves himself worthy with chainsaw and boomstick in hand. To get back to his time, they tell Ash he must go and find the the Necronomicon itself, say the magic words, and bring it back to the castle. Things go wrong when Ash forgets the magic words and brings the book back, waking up a whole army of the dead. Now, Ash must help these people defend their land or leave them suffering. It's a good plot executed decently.



ACTING:The acting in here is pretty standard for the series. Bruce Campbell plays his usual stoically comedic role as Ash. Embeth Davidtz also plays a decent part as Sheila, Ash's female interest in this film. Everybody else is pretty good. Nobody really stands out, except for maybe the Deadites, Richard Grove as Duke Henry, and Bill Moseley as the Deadite leader.

SCORE:The score in this film doesn't matter too much, but it's creepy with enough action in it to get the job done.

EFFECTS:The effects in here were very lazily done as compared to the previous two movies. The props were more obvious, but the make-up and digital effects were good enough to get the job done. A few of the effects I really liked, but most of them were a fall from the first two overall.

CAMERAWORK:I don't know if it was intentional or of it was just because of sloppy work, but the camerawork in here was really awful at certain parts. The camera shook during more than one of the most action-packed parts in the film. If it wasn't meant to be there for camp effect, then it would just be awful. However, I don't know Raimi's intentions with that move.



OTHER CONTENT:This addition to the Evil Dead series was definitely a fall from the previous two. This sequel focuses more on laughs and goofy scares than accomplishing both to the fullest as in the previous two. There's maybe a couple of light scares and then it's laden with goofy, campy laughs. Most of them are really funny, but some just don't seem to entertain me but instead make me wonder where Raimi was going with this addition. For the most part, I enjoyed the random, campy laughs, but it just got to be too much in the end with less spirit than the previous additions. This could stand alone as a campfest of a film, but either way, I'd have similar feelings about it.

OVERALL,an okay comedy horror with a good plot, standard acting, mood-fitting score, mostly lazy effects, shaky camerawork, a bigger focus on campy laughs, and less spirit than the other Evil Dead films.

Superhero Movie (2008) review

(2/10)

This overdone spoof movie borrows from the likes of Spiderman and X-Men, but doesn't live up to the epic spoof it wants to be. Most of the jokes are just too juvenile and crude.

PLOT:Rick Riker (Drake Bell) is a nobody at his school, crushing on popular girl Jill Johnson (Sara Paxton) and hanging with his best friend, Trey (Kevin Hart). Things start to change for Rick, however, when he's bitten by a genetically-mutated dragonfly which gives him the strength of ten men and the power to grip nearly anything easily. Now Rick becomes the Dragonfly, the town's new superhero. A new villain forms around this same time as well. Lou Landers (Christopher McDonald), owner of a big company in town, goes through an experiment to cure his terminal disease, but something goes wrong and changes him. Now he can drain the life out of any person by just touching them. With this power, he turns into the Hourglass, bent on taking over the world. It's up to the Dragonfly to stop him now, if he can get his wings. It's a decent spoof plot executed horribly.



ACTING:The acting in this movie was pretty bad. Drake Bell tried to bring things up as Rick Riker/The Dragonfly, but his script mainly brought him down. He was actually one of the better performances of the movie, as was Leslie Nielsen as Uncle Albert and Sara Paxton as Jill Johnson. Most every other performance sucked, mainly Christopher McDonald as Lou Landers, Ryan Hansen as Lance Landers, and Marion Ross as Aunt Lucille. The other performances I want to mention that weren't too horrible would be Keith David as the Police Chief, Tracy Morgan as Dr. Xavier, and Jeffrey Tambor as Dr. Whitby.

SCORE:The score really didn't matter much. It was all generic superhero-type score and a couple of other songs added in.

EFFECTS:The effects don't really matter in this movie, but they weren't good anyway. The digital effects were too fake, the prop effects were even more fake, and some of the more visual effects were just awfully done. Then again, this is just a spoof movie so they only do what can get the job done.



OTHER CONTENT:This was one of the worst spoof movies I've seen. The humor was more juvenile than most of the others I've seen and there were only about two parts that made me laugh out of something besides stupidity. I believe that it borrowed the right superhero movie aspects, but it didn't parody them well. I believe this could have been done way better than it was. Not to mention, the actual theme of "getting your wings" was just plain cheesy overall.

OVERALL, a sucky spoof movie with a decent plot, pretty bad acting, generic score, fake-looking effects, juvenile laughs, and a cheesy theme, but it could have been done better, and there were a couple of moments in there I found funny enough.

Grown Ups (2010) review

(3/10)

Well, this movie wasn't as terrible as I expected it to be, but it was still a bunch of squandered talent led by bad, stupid, and shallow jokes.

PLOT:After their old basketball coach passes away, five childhood friends come back together thirty years later with their families to reconnect. Lenny Feder (Adam Sandler) married a fashion designer (Salma Hayek Pinault) and had three spoiled rotten kids, Eric Lamonsoff (Kevin James) settled down and had a family, Kurt McKenzie (Chris Rock) had a family that brought out his sensitive side, Marcus Higgins (David Spade) still lives to party and gets drunk often, and Rob Hilliard (Rob Schneider) went through several marriages and had several kids but settled down with a much older woman. This group rents a cabin for a week and learns how to become kids again and bond with their families and each other. It's a decent plot executed very badly.



ACTING:The cast is all-star, including Adam Sandler, David Spade, Rob Schneider, Chris Rock, and Kevin James, but most of these talents are squandered on shallow jokes and one-dimensional personalities. One's the leader, one's a bit sensitive, one's big, one's a partier, and one's weird. They're all simple personalities to be honest. However, I didn't completely hate Adam Sandler, Kevin James, and David Spade's roles in this. Salma Hayek was also pretty decent. If there would be any other shiners, they would be Maria Bello as Sally Lamonsoff, Maya Rudolph as Deanne McKenzie, Steve Buscemi as Wiley, Madison Riley as Jasmine Hilliard, and Jamie Chung as Amber Hilliard.

SCORE:The soundtrack itself was mainly made up of a mix of good classic rock songs placed randomly throughout the movie. I liked the soundtrack.



OTHER CONTENT:This movie was mainly a train wreck with squandered talents sprinkled throughout. The jokes for the most part were shallow, stupid, unfunny, and predictable. However, there were some parts in there that were pretty hilarious to me. Some of the dramatic parts in here were pretty okay as well.

OVERALL,a bad comedy with a badly-executed plot, squandered acting talents, a good soundtrack, one-dimensional characters, and shallow, unfunny jokes, but some jokes made me laugh, and some dramatic parts weren't too bad either.

The Watcher in the Woods (1981) review

(2/10)

This sad attempt by Disney to make a horror movie didn't go over so well. The plot was predictable, the acting was bad, the execution was cheesy, and it wasn't scary. It was hardly even suspenseful.

PLOT:Jan Curtis (Lynn-Holly Johnson) and her family have been house-hunting for quite a while now but have finally found a secluded, English mansion in the woods. The mansion was previously owned by a creepy old lady named Mrs. Aylwood (Bette Davis) who's daughter disappeared near the property. Things are going fairly well for the family until creepy things start happening to Jan and her little sister. Jan catches wind of the story of Mrs. Aylwood's daughter eventually, and then starts to investigate her disappearance as it has a strange effect on her and her family. Little does she know that there's a dark history behind a few of this area's residents. It's a decent plot executed horribly.



ACTING:The acting in this movie is pretty bad. The only decent performance was Bette Midler as Mrs. Aylwood, and that was just decent. The rest of the acting was purely bad. The worst performances would have to have been by Carroll Baker as Helen Curtis and Lynn-Holly Johnson as Jan Curtis. There were a couple of okay performances by the likes of Ian Bannen and Eleanor Summerfield as Mrs. Thayer. They weren't too bad.

SCORE:The score was decent. The themes were pretty unique and creepy. They kind of reminded me of an early Argento-type score.

EFFECTS:The effects were pretty cheesy and cheaply used. The effects probably would've been better if used wiser. However, their use was lame and cheesy.



OTHER CONTENT:This movie was just a failed attempt for Disney at trying to make a horror movie. Firstly, the plot was shallowly predictable. I saw almost everything coming. Secondly, most of the twists in the movie were just as cheesy as they were predictable. I found myself either bored or laughing at the things that happened, up until the end where it just seemed tired and overbearing. Thirdly, the movie was neither scary nor very suspenseful. Nothing but maybe a miniature jump scare in the middle scared me. I found myself waiting for something to happen when nothing ever did. As for suspense, there was a good bit, but it didn't lead up to anything interesting so it was just wasted time. I found myself wondering why I even wasted my time on this. It had the spirit of an old, cheesy horror flick, but it didn't add any style to make up for it.

OVERALL,a sucky horror movie with a horribly-executed plot, bad acting, decent score, cheesy and misused effects, shallow predictability, cheesy plot twists, no scares and wasted suspense, but there was one good performance, and the score seemed to be the only thing with potential.

Wages of Sin (2006) review

(1/10)

Why I even bothered with this puzzles me. This is like one of the worst horror movies out there, but I just love to hate it.

PLOT:Sue Walker (Ashlie Clark) inherits a house deep in the country which her family used to own. She has no memory of the place after the time she spent in therapy. So, to check out the house, she takes her boyfriend, Ron (Brandon Michael), and a couple other friends of hers for the weekend. However, this house seems to have a bad reputation in the town she's in. When they arrive at the old house, memories start slowly coming back to Sue about what happened there: memories of a mentally-disturbed priest she used to be related to. Strange things happen to accompany that and disturb her and her friends. It's a decent plot executed horribly.



ACTING:The performances in this movie suck pretty horribly. No one really did a good job, but Ashlie Clark and Brandon Michael did a nearly-decent job of Sue and Ron. The other two sucked, especially Prentice Reedy. He was the worst actor in the whole movie. Billy St. John tried to play a reasonable part as the evil priest, but it ended up falling flat after a while.

SCORE:The score was interesting. It was repetative, but it wasn't horrible and fit the mood half of the time.

EFFECTS:The effects in here were terrible. They would have been better off with a tube of fake blood and Halloween decorations, which they may have used anyway.



OTHER CONTENT:This movie I only watched because it was given to me in a 4-pack as a gift. I didn't like it at all. The execution is lame along with everything else and the ending is terrible, too. However, I love to hate it. I can sit back and laugh at all of the flaws and treat it more as a comedy instead of a horror. It's like a Troll 2 or Plan 9 type of movie, where it's loved to be hated. I laugh at it rather than get scared.

OVERALL,a horrible horror movie with a horribly executed plot, sucky performances, interesting score, terrible effects, lame execution, and a terrible ending, but I love to hate it so much that I laugh at it.

Cars (2006) review

(8/10)

This is known as Pixar's least-favored movie that isn't rotten, but I really like it. The animation is solid, the story's pretty cool, and it captures a good bit of emotion.

PLOT:Lightning McQeen (Owen Wilson) is a famous rookie racecar racing to win the Piston Cup in his final race against rival Chick Hicks (Michael Keaten) and nearly-retired The King among other racers. McQeen is in the lead until his ignorance causes him to blow a tire and come in tied with the other two. Now he must beat them to the tie-breaking race in L.A. so he can win over Dinoco as his new sponsor; he convinces his trailer driver, Mack (John Ratzenberger) to drive through the night. Due to an accident, McQueen is dropped in the middle of nowhere and brought in by a Sheriff and taken to court. He finds himself in the small town of Radiator Springs where he's held against his will and forced to fix the road he damaged. McQueen's always been an arrogant, self-loving snob with no friends but himself, but this "vacation" could warm his heart as he befriends the redneck pick-up, Mater (Larry the Cable Guy), the smart chick Porsche, Sally (Bonnie Hunt), the bitter leader, Doc Hudson (Paul Newman), and many others. It's a good plot executed pretty greatly.



VOICES:The voice acting wasn't half bad. This had to have been one of Owen Wilson's best roles as the arrogant Lightning McQueen. This may have also been Larry the Cable Guy's best role as Mater, considering his others are pretty stupid; he actually made Mater a loveable character. The other shiners would be Bonnie Hunt as Sally, Paul Newman as Doc Hudson, Michael Keaten as Chick Hicks, Cheech Marin as Ramone, Tony Shalhoub as Luigi, Paul Dooley as Sarge, George Carlin as Filmore, Joe Ranft as Red, John Ratzenberger as Mack, and Mario Andretti as himself.

SCORE:The score is pretty good. It's done well by Randy Newman, with also a kickin' soundtrack. The soundtrack includes the likes of Sheryl Crow, Rascal Flatts, Brad Paisely, James Taylor, and more.

ANIMATION:The animation in here is excellent. The cars all look shiny and realistic, as you could really touch them. This has to be some of the most realistic animation Pixar has done, and it's what leads the movie mainly along.



OTHER CONTENT:This is known as one of the weakest of the Pixar films, and I really don't know why. The story is actually pretty story, the humor is light, and it has a great emotional impact. The way the shots are caught with the scenery and action all put together actually incorporates a high emotional impact. However, the formula present in many other family films is seen in here, and that is probably what brings it down for most. The formula of a jerk taking a change of heart is seen here, and because of that, it makes McQueen a mainly unlikeable character. That's not too good for the main character, and that can also ruin the film.

OVERALL,a great Pixar film with a great plot, good voice acting, well done score with a kickin' soundtrack, realistic animation, and a high emotional impact, but there is a family formula present and the main character comes off as a tad unlikeable because of it.

The Miracle Worker (2000) review

(5/10)

I used to really like this movie when I was younger, but seeing it again I realize how cheap and ridiculous it can be. However, it still tells a touching story with some highlight performances.

PLOT:Helen Keller (Hallie Kate Eisenberg) was born deaf and blind into a family of an arrogant Captain (David Strathairn), an overprotective mother, and a spiteful son named James (Lucas Black). Lately Helen has grown restless and acts up frequently. Her parents have considered everything up to sending her to an asylum until an Annie Sullivan (Alison Elliot) comes to help. Annie used to be deaf and blind as well until she had surgery, and was one of her institute's best students. Annie attempts to teach Helen proper manners and how to speak in sign language, but she's so spoiled that she doesn't want to learn easy. Now Annie must teach her how to speak and understand while keeping her patience with her, the arrogant Captain, and the short time she is given. It's a good plot executed in a pretty mediocre manner.



ACTING:The performances in here were ok, but nothing above that. The best performance would have to be Alison Elliot as Annie Sullivan. I saw her emotion in each scene. She was particularly great, but she was the best in this movie. The other shiners would be Lucas Blake as James Keller and David Strathairn as Captain Keller. Even though the were also pretty good, they sucked overall as well. Lucas' voice eventually got on your nerves after a while. Ironically, the worst performance in the movie was the main character of Helen Keller, played by Hallie Kate Eisenberg. She couldn't act (even though she was a child) and kind of ruined the whole movie for all. It really got on your nerves.

SCORE:The score was mainly some cheesy inspirational stuff, but it didn't sound horrible.



OTHER CONTENT:This movie could've been great if done right, but it didn't live up to the same feat as the true story did. The movie was cheesy, ridiculous at times (due to the acting), and very stereotypical with its characters. However, the movie did have some positive aspects. Plotwise, it told the story pretty accurately. Also, there were a few scenes that drew in some great emotions. But the movie overall was pretty mediocre.

OVERALL,a MEDIOCRE movie with a mediocre plot, ok acting, cheesy score, cheesy and ridiculous parts, and stereotypical characters, but there was a good performance or two, it followed the story pretty well, and it added some good emotion into a few scenes.

Salvage (2005) review

(1/10)

Sometimes I wonder why I even bother with these independent, low-budget horrors. Almost none of them are good anymore.

PLOT:Claire Parker (Lauren Currie Lewis) is a normal, 19-year-old girl. She works as a night clerk at a convenience store, goes to school in religious study, can't drive, lives with her mother, and has a jerky boyfriend (Cody Darbe) who works down at the salvage yard. One day, when Claire's waiting for her boyfriend to come and get her from the store, a strange man named Duke (Chris Ferry) pulls up in her boyfriend's truck. She reluctantly accepts the ride, but this guy starts to give her the creeps. When she gets home, she locks herself in her house, but Duke tries to get in to return an earring she "left" in the truck. After a brief argument, he sets it down and goes away. Everything's back to normal until Claire notices that she forgot to lock the back door. In a scramble, Duke sneaks up behind her, knocks her down, and drags her into the basement. We then cut to the next morning at the store; Claire believes it all to be a dream. However, each day starts to go the same and she keeps having visions of this Duke guy killing her and her boyfriend. Little does she know, she's reliving a memory. It's a decent idea for a plot executed horribly.



ACTING:The acting in here was purely terrible. Every performance was overracted as it seemed. Lauren C. Lewis' acting sucked, but she looked great. I think she would have worked better as a model than an actress. As for the other two leads, they sucked as well. However, a few of the minor characters did a decent job, such as the male convience store clerk.

SCORE:The score was just generic. It sounded like it tried to copy and mesh that of other horror films altogether. For example (I know it's not a horror), I could sense a mockery being made of the theme from "Eyes Wide Shut" in one scene. The score? Truly generic.

EFFECTS:The effects were pretty bad as well. It looked just like strawberry jello spread all over the place. It aggrivates me when even a low-budget movie can't even get the effects right.



OTHER CONTENT:This movie's formula is that of a psychological horror. The twist in it not only doesn't make sense, but is muddled and confused within the whole generic-horror formula. There's almost nothing good about this movie except for the couple minor characters and the humor. This supposed horror movie actually had a few clever jokes intertwined with in the failed terror. The right word to describe this movie is either terrible or horrible.

OVERALL,a horrible psychological horror with a horribly executed plot, terrible acting, generic horror score, pretty bad effects, an illogical and confused twist, and failed scares, but there were a few decent minor roles and a few clever jokes snuck in.

Shark Tale (2004) review

(4/10)

This is one of DreamWorks' flops that reassures me that Pixar's tons better.

PLOT:Oscar (Will Smith) has been a nobody his whole life: broke, ridiculed, and working at a "Whale Wash", the fish paralell to a car wash. One day, when Oscar's boss, Sykes (Martin Scorsese), tells Oscar he needs five grand that he borrowed within 24-hours, Oscar must get it. With the help of his friend, Angie (Renee Zellweger), he gets it and squanders it, leaving Sykes and his jellyfish minions (Doug E. Doug and  Ziggy Marley) to take drastic measures. Meanwhile, the sharks are at the top of the food chain and rulers of the ocean. The lead shark, Don Lino (Robert De Niro) tells Sykes that he's retiring and leaving his rule to his two sons Frankie and Lenny (Jack Black). The flaw in this is that Lenny is a vegitarian shark that can't kill a fish. Lino then tells Frankie to go out and show Lenny the ropes. Well, these two storylines meet when a fatal mistake klls Frankie and Oscar is blamed. Due to a white lie, he is now known as the shark-slaying savior of the reef. This, of course, can't last with the sharks after him, Lenny on the loose, and the fact that it's all a lie. It's a cleverly-thought plot executed pretty badly.



VOICES:The voice cast is mainly all-star, inlcuding the voices I've listed above along with Angelina Jolie, Michael Imperioli, Peter Falk, Katie Couric, and Bobb'e J. Thompson. However, this experienced cast is squandered; even the most expert voice talents, such as Jack Black, fail and become annoying. The only voices that actually did a pretty great job with their roles were Robert De Niro as Don Lino, Martin Scorsese as Sykes, and Doug E. Doug as Bernie with an honorable mention to Katie Couric as Katie Current (a clever play on words). Renee Zellweger did okay, in my eyes, but she still was pretty annoying, as the others were.

SCORE:The soundtrack is actually pretty upbeat and fun. It includes songs by artists such as Christina Aguilera, Missy Elliot, Ziggy Marley, Sean Paul, Justin Timberlake, Mary J. Blige, India.Arie, Pussycat Dolls, D12, and way more. Not to mention, this has one of the most memorable compositions by DreamWorks beloved Hanz Zimmer.

ANIMATION:This is the highlight of the entire movie. If it weren't for the colorful and detailed animation, this movie would have been even more of a drag.



OTHER CONTENT:This is definitely one of the worst DreamWorks movies. It's generic, unfunny, and at times, boring. This does have a few good things, however. There were times when it was clever and a lot of fun, and some jokes actually did inspire a chuckle or two. Still, it's pretty bad.

OVERALL,a not-bad-but-not-good DreamWorks movie with a pretty badly executed plot, squandered voice talents, fun soundtrack, detailed animation, generic style, unfunny jokes, and boring moments, but it can be clever and a lot of fun with its moments.