Evil Dead 2 (1987) review

(9/10)

   Watching this film is literally the equivalent of walking into a carnival funhouse. The scares, many perks and execution of the film itself just ensue hilarity, and overall feeling of glorious camp, and a good spirit for the world of horror film. From the performances to the amazing yet cheap effects, this film will sit you down, crack you up, and quite possibly even scare you, but not too much. Unlike it's predecessor, it's not meant to be as serious. 

PLOT: Ash (Bruce Campbell) and his girlfriend, Linda (Denise Bixler) decide to take a trip to an abandoned cabin in the woods to spend some time together. However, things start getting strange when Ash discovers a recorded message reading off details of a race of demons and performing an indication to summon them. Soon after, Linda gets possessed by one of these demons and Ash must kill her off and stay the night in the cabin alone, for the one road out has been destroyed by the evil. Meanwhile, Annie Knowby (Sarah Berry), the daughter of the voice on the message, has found certain pages of the involved book: the Book of the Dead, and plans to bring them back to the cabin to research and preserve. Up until the point Annie and her party meet with Ash, and even past that point, chaos ensues in and around the cabin, from possessed corpses roaming around to laughing furniture and even to a possessed hand. The plot is excellently executed, with the execution mixing it up anyway it can be. If predictability would be your worry while watching this film, I can guarantee it won't be a problem. This film's plot execution goes in so many different directions that you would swear it's a staged show of a sort. The plot in itself is pretty nice for a horror film: a young couple having to fight demons in a cabin in the woods. It might be a bit general, but it's definitely interesting. 

ACTING: The performances in this film were all done very well, with Bruce Campbell being treated as the shining star as Ash. Campbell's performance in this film is known as one of the most iconic in the history of horror film-making. From a highly-quotable script to key scenes emphasizing the emotion of insanity and pure exhaustion in Ash's character, Campbell definitely cleans house with a truly campy performance of a new horror icon. Aside from Campbell, the other performances were also very well cast. Denise Bixler , Sarah Berry, Kassie DePaiva, and Dan Hicks all fit their parts well as the sultry Linda, the wise Annie, the roughneck Bobby Joe, and the redneck Jake. Their performances would have probably been a little different had they not been cast just right for the character they were willing to play. 

SCORE: The score in this film is very well done, but nothing too special. It enhances the drama, horror, and intensity of the moments, but it doesn't introduce any truly memorable themes to the horror world. 

EFFECTS: The special effects in this film are very well done. To get the special effects just right, director Sam Raimi went from having make-up effects, to digital effects, and even to claymation effects, just to have the mood and image just how he wanted it. The make-up effects are definitely well-thought out but full of camp. Some pretty freaky-looking monsters are introduced throughout the movie, from a deadite Frankenstein to a large, madman of a creature. The digital effects were very cool and enhancing to the film, such as the clouds clearing out of a possessed one's eyes. The claymation effects had to have been my favorite variety of effects Raimi used. The creepy style of the effects and also the camp mood they gave off made the film ten times better than some would believe it to be. 

MISC. THOUGHTS: This film is like a horror film funhouse in several ways: you never know what's going to happen next and it's always going to make you laugh. This film is a creative trip through horror camp that's meant to be fun and unpredictable as well as memorable, which it is without a doubt. However, the sequel's added length of humor takes away a key aspect that its predecessor, Raimi's original Evil Dead, had. The original Evil Dead actually had the potential to be scary. The way it was shot and how vague it was in how it was meant to be taken seriously or not gave the original an accidental potential to actually be frightening. This sequel doesn't have near as many opportunities to come off as scary as its predecessor had. This, however, is the only flaw in this film filled with B-movie camp and glorification. 

   The sequel to Raimi's original horror classic holds up, with fun situations to watch around every corner and an awesomely-played lead to crack the audience up, as well as amazing, lower-budget effects to enhance the film's mood. The film is full of camp and B-movie glory, much like its predecessor, but it doesn't have the potential to be truly scary, as its older sibling had.  

The Screaming Skull (1958) review

(7/10)

   Though this movie may seem like terrible, B-movie garbage to some, I have to admit that I had a lot of fun watching this one. Though cheesy, the intended scares and concept of the movie's horror aspect came off as very entertaining and nostalgic, if you will, in relation to the time of the black-and-white, B-movie mania. Even with that, the performances have great potential, and the movie carries a great spirit of the horror it wants to be.

PLOT: Newlyweds Eric (John Hudson) and Jenni (Peggy Webber) Whitlock have just moved back into the large house of Eric's late wife, which has been carefully maintained by the creepy groundskeeper, Mickey (Alex Nichol), who withholds a deep respect for the dead woman's memory. The marriage is going great for the newlyweds until Jenni starts seeing strange apparitions in her home, such as random skulls everywhere and flashes of Eric's late wife. With all these apparitions of terror, she starts hearing random screams similar to the peacocks that waltz around the yard. Eric, hearing of these occurrences, even starts to think she's going insane. Is her mind getting to her or are these apparitions really coming to her? The plot is actually pretty decent if you replace the skulls with more threatening apparitions of a sort. The execution is both a letdown and a prime factor of the movie's camp. The execution makes the movie come off as ridiculous, with imagery failing to even give you a chill until maybe once near the end. However, the execution also seems to glorify the camp in the movie, making the bad seem so much more entertaining and hilarious than it really is.



ACTING: The acting performances in this movie are actually really good, though the content lets down the potential. Our two leads, Eric and Jenni Whitlock, are actually very well played by John Hudson and Peggy Webber. Anytime the leads needed to show emotion, it was performed excellently, with several blood-curdling screams from Webber and general conversation with Hudson. Along with our leads, Alex Nichol (also the director) supplied a more-than-decent performance as Mickey, the creepy groundskeeper. His performance of the groundskeeper really tried to set the mood for the movie, even though the true mood it was setting was never really reached. The movie in itself is extremely low-budget with characters; aside from these three, we have exactly two other characters: Russ Conway and Tony Jackson as Mr. and Mrs. Snow. They didn't do anything significant performance-wise, however.

SCORE: The score of the film tried to set a creepy kind of mood to freak the audience out, with operatic-type themes suggesting something ghostly. However, with all of the cheese and camp of the movie, it feels misplaced and almost laughable. It's definitely a well done horror score, but it just doesn't fit and kind of enhances the hilarity and entertainment I feel during this movie.

EFFECTS: The effects in here were really cheap. There really isn't much to say about them, considering the majority of them were skull props and occasional faded-out flashes of skulls and ghosts a.k.a. people in sheets. The one effect I thought to be decently interesting for its time would be the skull corpse near the end, for it actually stands and moves and looks a little like it poses a threat.



MISC. THOUGHTS: With all of the low-budget fails of which I have described, including the non-threatening effects, not-scary imagery, and ensuing, unintentional hilarity, you would think I would mark this movie as terrible. However, I don't have the power to say that this movie didn't entertain me one bit. The promise of needing a coffin in the beginning to the unintentional hilarity of the scares to me just come off as glorious camp. This seems like it unintentionally wanted to be a parody of its own time frame of film. The era of midnight shock-horror in the 50s and 60s were very well cheesy yet known as notorious days in early horror filmmaking, and this film seems to accidentally glorify just that. It feels almost like this is intended to be just a low-budget camp fest to glorify its own era of horror. Though it may not have been intended to come off as that, it came off as that to me and I really have to say I enjoyed the movie with this aspect in mind. It was actually a lot of fun to watch.

   This old midnight horror flick was very cheaply made and quite bad, but it was very fun to watch. The acting performances were actually pretty good and the unintentional camp made this a fun movie for me to watch, as I found it hilarious and all in good spirit of this sub-genre of horror back in its time. If you look at it from a more serious standpoint, the execution is ridiculous, the score is almost misfitting, and the effects are failed attempts, making this feel cheaper than it actually is. The factor that determines whether you like this movie or not is how much fun you actually have watching it, and for me, there was a lot of fun had actually watching this.

Hoboken Hollow (2006) review

(2/10)

   This low-budget, roadside horror had to be one of the worst I've seen. I didn't expect much from it to begin with, but when it promises to "scare the hell out of you", I expect it to at least give me a jump. Wooden performances, cheap effects, bad plot execution, and amateur editing show the true meaning of "low-budget" in a movie.

PLOT: In a small town area near the border of Texas, drifters tend to crowd to the highway, hitchhiking for a place to go. A small ranch nearby always seems to have their eyes on these drifters, however. We follow a small group of guys who get picked up by the owners of this ranch to work for a few days. However, they don't know that once they get "hired" to work on the ranch, they can never leave. The owners of this ranch, the Broderick family, shackle up the new "transients" and force them to work for food or succumb to drastic torture, such as abuse by cattle prod or hanging. However, the brains of the operation is kept hidden from the audience, with deals being made secretly within business and law to get land and make more cash. The plot itself wouldn't be so bad if it had more colorful and actually scary elements, but with the major execution, it just falls flat on its face.



ACTING: The performances in this movie are atrociously hollow and wooden. No actor or actress gives a performance memorable enough to be a realistic character. The writer/director of this film decides to use grotesque characters, including a half blind man, a disfigured woman, and a mentally ill main character, to give them some kind of significance. If it wasn't for the blatant physical traits on these characters, you wouldn't know exactly who was different from the other. I'm not even kidding when I say some performances are downright laughable. We do have some slightly notable minor performances, however, by Dennis Hopper and Robert Carradine. If we had more by them, it might have saved this movie by maybe one or a half rating. The only performance that I thought to have been fairly decent would be Rudolf Martin as Howie Beale. He played his part fairly well compared to the rest of the cast and the terrible script/screenwriting.

SCORE: The score wasn't anything too special. The score marked the changes in emotion and suspense, with some southern-sounding songs to set the mood. The score we hear in this movie is basically just the generic horror movie intense jump score.

EFFECTS: The effects in here were cheap and lame, to put it bluntly. The effects of the grotesque characters' appearances and the blood and gore were so cheaply done that the effects they meant to set off were only labeled as pathetic in my book. Literally speaking, there is a fake eyeball stuck on a stick, portrayed as the eye stalk. Along with that, the blood, severed limbs, and defects on the characters looked like something I could do for a Halloween party. Low budget is definitely squandered on this movie, because you can make low budget look good, as seen from Raimi's original Evil Dead films.

EDITING/CAMERA: The editing in this movie is cheap and well. It looked as if a teenager were put in charge of when to cut and how to transition. Often during the movie, we're faded out into a direct next scene, as if this were a television special on Sci-Fi or the like. Also, we're left with too many seconds of fade into black. The audience is left staring at nothing for a good portion of the time. If one is going to make a movie, one should at least make it look professional.



MISC. THOUGHTS: This movie actually would have had potential if the execution and screenwriting had been greatly revised and written with thought put into it. I could see this being a pretty decent horror movie if it had just been put into more professional hands or at least treated with greater professional manner. Not everybody can be a filmmaker, especially not a rich one. I will admit that the twist at the end did catch me off guard and satisfy me to an extent, but if the rest of the movie could just catch up to the one moment of clever plot it had, things might have worked out for Hoboken Hollow.

   This movie definitely was one of the worst in its genre I've seen, with the major plot execution failing, atrocious performances, generic horror movie score, lame, cheap special effects, amateur editing, and wasted potential. However, it got a few small things right and did actually have the potential to do something decent.

MirrorMask (2005) review

(7/10)

The movie may be a fall from Jim Henson's original works, but it's definitely a visionary piece of effect art with an interesting plot and decent scripting.

PLOT:Helena (Stephanie Leonidas) is in a circus troupe with her father (Rob Brydon) and mother (Gina McKee). She's never liked being confined strictly to the circus and always wanted to get out in the real world and live for herself. To deal with her pain, she draws out her feelings in creative styles, covering her walls in her bedroom. One night, Helena's mother has an episode and passes out, putting her in the hospital for immediate surgery. Helena blames herself for her mother's illness and falls asleep the night of her surgery with stress on her mind. When Helena wakes up, she finds herself in a dream world made up entirely of the drawings she has hung on her wall. While there, she discovers strange creatures and meets new people, who all wear masks as a normal tradition. Helena befriends a juggler named Valentine (Jason Berry) and learns that she has switched lives with the Princess of Dark in that land. The Princess had stolen the charm that put the Princess of Light to an endless sleep, which is referred to as the MirrorMask. Helena must restore the normality in this dream world while still trying to get back to her own world and stopping the Princess from ruining her life. It's a great plot executed very well. There's a few minor holes and problems with the fabric and basis of the plot, which I'll discuss later.



ACTING:The performances in this movie were fairly good. Stephanie Leonidas played a decent part as Helena and the princess, Anti-Helena, but didn't truly shine out. She didn't impress me too much. The performances I really enjoyed were Rob Brydon as Helena's father and the prime minister of the dream world; Gina McKee as Helena's mother, the Queen of Light, and the Queen of Dark; and Jason Berry as Valentine. These performances weren't excellently done, but I enjoyed the way they were played, especially Jason Berry's part. He added personality to the part of Valentine, the juggler and "very important man" of the dream world. The rest of the minor parts were decent but nothing that absolutely blew me away. The acting in here is just fair: nothing extremely spectacular.

SCORE:The score in here was decent. The themes were cool sounding but not extremely memorable. The most memorable part in the soundtrack would have to be the cover of "(They Long to Be) Close to You", which is haunting and very well organized.

EFFECTS:The effects in here is what sells the movie as a unique artwork. The effects in here are from the mind of the great mind of Jim Henson and his crew. The effects combine Henson-style costume design with CG animation and the result is mind-bending and rather freaky. I like the effects, but I believe they haven't aged as well compared to the effects used in today's film industry. The effects were really good and nice for their time, but they just don't hold up now as Henson's traditional puppet fare does today.



OTHER CONTENT:Neil Gaiman, writer of several books and TV episodes (including episodes of Doctor Who and Coraline), collaborated on writing for this movie. The plot itself is very interesting, while all the while deriving from the right places (The Wizard of Oz, Labyrinth, etc.), but I found a few holes such as: What happened to the Princess in the end? Did this even happen or was it just a pointless dream? Many other questions arise in my head as I think about this movie's outcome and execution. Also, the script had moments I both loved and hated, including clever riddles and dialogue among pointless gags and cheesy conversations. There were points in the movie overall I loved and hated. However, the movie did entertain and did wow me with its effects and vision, as ancient as they seem now.

OVERALL,it's a good movie with an interesting plot, fair performances, decent score, and unique effects. However, the effects didn't age as well as Henson's other fare, several plot holes arise, and the movie/dialogue's likability fluctuated with me.

Jersey Boys (2014) review

(8/10)

Eastwood's take on the famed musical breathes new life into The Four Seasons history, but it seems like the film doesn't know what it truly wants to be, as well as proposing a failed narrative style.

PLOT:Frankie Castelluccio (John Lloyd Young) is a training hairdresser in the streets of New Jersey. Everyone claims his voice is a God-given gift, including his best friend and bad influence, Tommy DeVito (Vincent Piazza), and his protective mob boss, Gyp DeCarlo (Christopher Walken). One day, after days of jail time for many of his associates, Tommy decides to start a group with Frankie and try to get famous, hiring Bob Gaudio as the songwriter (Erich Bergen) and collaborating with Bob Crewe (Mike Doyle) as the recording agent. After recording "Sherry", "Big Girls Don't Cry", and "Walk Like a Man", the fame of The Four Seasons shoots to the top. However, many obstacles still stand in the group's way for true fame, such as large, unpaid debts, family conflicts, and personality conflicts between the members of the group. It's a great plot idea executed decently well. Some things could have been better.



ACTING:The performances in this film were very well done. John Lloyd Young, Vincent Piazza, and Michael Lomenda as Frankie, Tommy, and Nick were the top performances of the film. The emotion and chemistry between the characters in the film caught and held your attention to the fullest extent. Every dramatic scene is pulled together in the fullest extent by these three performances, as well as Erich Bergen and Mike Doyle as Gaudio and Crewe. Veteran actor, Christopher Walken, also played an excellent part as mob boss Gyp DeCarlo, adding a complex yet gentle stoicism to the character's outlook. Almost every performance in the film is nicely done, with extra regards to Frey Tingley as Francine Valli, Barry Livingston as the accountant, and Katherine Narducci as Mary Rinaldi. These performances weren't the best I've ever seen, but they definitely did their jobs with pride.

SCORE:The score and soundtrack to this film is excellently done. John Lloyd Young and the rest of the crew did a brilliant job of covering the hits of The Four Seasons, with a sound almost just like the unique sound of classic Valli and his Four Seasons. All of the major hits are included in here, from the three mentioned earlier to "Can't Take My Eyes Off of You", "My Eyes Adored You", "December, 1963 (Oh, What a Night)", and many others. The covers sound almost as good as the official tracks.



OTHER CONTENT:This film was a very great portrayal of the life and times of Frankie Valli and the Four Seasons, but the execution had a few minor problems that kept the film from being a true gem. The film tries to please as many audiences as it can with sensational musical numbers, mature drama, and a light-hearted style of narrative. Not only does the narrative style fail and come off as unnecessary and cheesy, but the constantly-switching tones of the film deter it from being what it was truly meant to be, which was either a light-hearted play or a serious docudrama. The film had its high points, which were greatly high in regards to the professional direction of Clint Eastwood, but it won't go down in history as a masterpiece of a film, as a great handful of Eastwood's works have in the past.

OVERALL,a great docudrama with a great plot idea, captivating performances, excellent soundtrack breathing new life into Valli's music, and some great high points. However, the narrative style fails to flow along with the film itself, also adding to the problem that it's inconsistent with what type of film it truly wants to be.

Mr. Peabody and Sherman (2014) review

(8/10)

This obscured-to-me revamp of an old cartoon was way more than I predicted with a little something for all ages, a nice cast, and a sense of fun adventure embedded.

PLOT:Mr. Peabody (Ty Burrell) is a wealthy, smart, and famous dog in the world of most fields of education, with an adopted son, Sherman (Max Charles). The two go on several crazy adventures all the time in a time machine Mr. Peabody invented called the WABAC. Things are going normal for the two until Sherman's first day of school, where a girl bullies him and he bites her to fight her off. Things start getting complicated when Mrs. Grunion (Allison Jenner), a mean-spirited social services worker, decides to stop by Peabody and Sherman's house to investigate. To patch things up, Mr. Peabody invites Penny (Ariel Winter), the girl Sherman bit, and her parents (Ellie Kemper and Stephen Colbert) over for dinner to make up for things. Sherman and Penny are still against each other, but things start to change when Sherman disobeys his dad and shows Penny the WABAC. From there on out, things get very complicated. It's a good plot executed very well.



VOICES:The voice acting in here was pretty well done. Ty Burrell voiced the part of Mr. Peabody excellently, putting a good, matching personality. The younger performances from Max Charles and Ariel Winter were alright, but easily separated from the rest. The cameo voices and supporting cast is mainly what takes the cake. Stephen Colbert, Stanley Tucci, Mel Brooks, and Patrick Warburton all played excellent parts as Paul Peterson, Leonardo da Vinci, Albert Einstein, and Agamemnon. All of the supporting cast was definitely very well chosen. The voices overall were pretty entertaining.

SCORE:The score was interesting, detailed, and very well done by the great Danny Elfman, with cameos by John Lennon and Jimi Hendrix.

ANIMATION:The animation was very fun and pretty detailed in a cartoonish sense. The animation of the past history, the WABAC, Mr. Peabody's plans, and even the characters faces were just well done, with every piece falling right into its place.



OTHER CONTENT:This was definitely a fun-filled movie with many references peppered throughout its length, from a Spartacus in a crowd of people to a flash of classic rock in the midst of dinner. The movie is definitely made for a wide age range, including reference humor for the older generation, familiar things for the middle generation, and even juvenile potty humor for the younger generation. The movie, however, isn't perfect by all means. The plot is just impossibility stacked on impossibility, making the whole aspect of time travel seem overdone. The humor also seems so wide that it isn't sure which generation it wants to please the most. This is a good, fun viewing, but it's nowhere near the best family animation.

OVERALL,a great revamp with a well done plot, excellent voice acting, interesting Elfman score, detailed and cartoony animation, many references, and a wide target audience, but the plot seems to overdone in convoluted time travel aspects and the humor doesn't seem to know who it wants to please.

The Lego Movie (2014) review

(9/10)

This blast of wild and wacky fun entertains with many creative jokes, a smart few plot twists in relation to the reality of Lego, and a very fun cast to work from. However, the plot seems way too familiar overall.

PLOT:In the world of Lego, everyone is the same. They all follow the instructions set before them and like all the same things with little creative thought in mind. One Lego person in particular, Emmett (Chris Pratt), becomes special one day when he discovers an unknown red object under his job site. Within discovery of this apparently special piece, Emmett is arrested and taken in for question by the Good Cop/Bad Cop (Liam Neeson) about a secret resistance Emmett's never heard of. After being busted out by rebellious Wyldstyle (Elizabeth Banks), Emmett is taken to the secret alliance of the master builders, the most creative Legos in the world, including the blindly wise Vitruvius (Morgan Freeman), the always-cheerful Unikitty (Alison Brie), Batman (Will Arnett), the reassembled Metalbeard (Nick Offerman) and Spaceman Benny (Charlie Day) among many others. The team of greatly experienced allies along with everyday Lego. Emmet, must unite to battle the controlling force of mastermind President Business (Will Ferrell) and stop him from destroying the Lego worlds with the mysterious Kragle. It's a good plot executed greatly.



VOICES:The voice acting in this movie is excellently done by a very impressive list of top actors. Chris Pratt did a very great and humorous job as inexperienced hero, Emmett, setting the scene just well for everyone else, including Elizabeth Banks as Wyldstyle, who was just as great. The best performances besides these two lead performances would have to be from Morgan Freeman as Vitruvius, Liam Neeson as Good Cop/Bad Cop, Will Arnett as Batman, Will Ferrell as President Business, Charlie Day as Benny, and Alison Brie as Unikitty. These performances all sounded great and just added the tones of humor and emotion to the movie's plot, entertaining all the way. Among all of these great performances, many other cameos and quick roles occurred excellently that were definitely worth noting, including Anthony Daniels as C-3PO, Billy Dee Williams as Lando, Shaquille O'Neal as himself, Channing Tatum as Superman, Todd Hansen as Gandalf, Will Forte as Abraham Lincoln, and Jonah Hill as Green Lantern. All of these extra performances were brilliantly and humorously done with nods to every fan in the book.

SCORE:The score in this movie is very well done by the great Mark Mothersbaugh of Devo and Rugrats fame. Mothersbaugh did an excellent job at composing a fun score of modern and classic sound for true cartoon effect. Also on the soundtrack is an original song by Tegan and Sara with The Lonely Island, which is fun and gives the movie a very memorable song for the kids and fans.

ANIMATION:The animation in this movie is fantastic with very great detail to the Lego world and its several perks. The CG animation of each piece, building, and motion just goes together very well with excellent detail and impressive vision, from the movement of the people to the fast building of the master builders and from the abstract thought of Emmett's mind to the sea and widespread effects of the Lego world. The animation in here is just excellent eye candy.



OTHER CONTENT:This movie is a great treat for kids, teenagers, and even certain adults that can catch all the references. This movie is just impressive entertainment for all ages with many cool plot twists and a subtle realism to the Lego culture and its people. However, this movie is by far completely original in plot. Aside from the borrowed characters and character references, the plot is derived greatly from Orwell's 1984, using the basis of complete thought control and rebellion of few people to give freedom of choice back. Aside from the constant derivations for the plot and its twists, the movie was a fun ride that could entertain nearly anyone.

OVERALL,an awesome movie with a good plot, impressive cast, excellent cartoon score, fantastic detailed animation, lots of references, plenty of entertainment, and many Lego perks, but there are far too many derivations for the plot development for it to be original humor.