To'kun Reviews

Most Haunted (2002–2019)

In defense of the show...

[23 July 2004]

I've long had an interest in the paranormal and recently discovered this TV series because North American television stations rarely carry such programming that lasts beyond two seasons (before getting cancelled).

After watching everything that the North American TV Networks has to offer, Most Haunted adds to the pathos of this "Haunted Tales of the Unknown" culture. When comparing MTV's Fear (which exists mostly to shock), Sightings and Unexplained Mysteries (which does try to give facts) to this UK show, I believe the folks in the other side of the Atlantic takes the stuff seriously and moreso historically. There is reason to; there is more than 800 years of history that the UK has to offer than the 200 or so years America had for potentially scary sites.

The question everybody asks is if it is all fake? The low-rumbling music added in post-production does add to the creep factor so the technical embellishments are obviously there. But if I didn't hear of these places before in my own research or on other TV shows that mention these same places, I'd be dubious too. The odd news report reporting capturing a ghostly figure on tape will validate the place, especially after viewing the Most Haunted episode. I remember most news stations making a byline about the cameras in the Tower of London capturing an unknown, possibly ghostly, figure opening a door.

Spirits do exist, and I suspect that they do have more intelligence than we grant them for. After all, they were mortal once. These 'ghosts' have no reason to fully make themselves appear for the mass audiences to see. They are more content to make noises and throw things at would-be investigators. It's like the magical world of Harry Potter; it is not a good idea to expose muggles (mortals) to the wizarding world (the 'other side') because, they will never fully accept it because of the lessons taught to them in current science/culture/religion about death and the other side.

If I was to give one gripe about the show, one cannot fully investigate a haunted site in just one night. It takes at least a few months to several years of investigation to fully explore all the possible machinisms that may bring about a physical, ghostly, manifestation. What the show does is to compress all of that in one 45 minute show, story-written, to bring about a climax that (sometimes) satisfies the viewer.

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)

A pared down version of the novel.

[4 June 2004]

* Mild Spoiler Alert * :)

Even though I'm rusty in remembering all the events that happened in the book version, I felt that the film made a great compliment to visualizing what are the important parts (and plot moving events) of the book. Sadly, this leaves very little development in the feud between Hermione and Ron's familiars and very little screen time to fully introduce Sirius Black. If I remember correctly, Black signed the consent form to visit the village by the end of the novel and nothing is revealed in the film about that.

By spending time in glamorizing the CG generated world of Harry Potter, it distracts than getting to the point of the story. There is a point of doing it in the first movie, the second time around it does get bothersome and the third -- you get the idea. :) I'm glad very little time is spent in the Quiddich matches, which are more heavily prominent in the book series.

Sadly, this leaves holes to the overall story and for what purists may consider "Rowling's Vision that must be put in the big screen" (tm). I didn't mind the changes made to make the movie, otherwise it would've been a longer movie with dull moments to sit through. It is something which I think the fourth movie will end up being when considering how voluminous it is; I'll be very curious to see how that will get pared down).

Brother Bear (2003)

A film about myths & legends

[9 November 2003]

* MILD SPOILERS* Because I live in the Pacific Northwest, where this film is based, I quickly recognized the visuals that Brother Bear invoked from that bygone era. Given certain rumblings that some fans give about how Disney tends to distort certain tales (or images in this case), I find this movie mostly unflawed. It is prestine in the images of the Pacific Northwest. The landscapes are exactly as I remembered it in a road trip I done as a kid up to Prince Rupert. Having not heard any information about this movie before going in, the hint of it taking place in the Canadian landscape is quickly evident with the Moose doing classic routines. Initially, I didn't realize it was Rick Moranis and Dave Thomas doing their classic SCTV Mckenzie Brothers routines until I saw their names scroll by in the credits but I'm the wiser now. :-)

Having read some Indian legends, I was quite impressed with the amount of quality control put in this movie. What stood out to me is the story. It invoked some aspects of the real stories I've read. Neither the journey of the spirit and nor the lesson to be learned is uncommon for movie-scripts, but for this one, it was effectively pulled off. These motifs are quintessential elements in tribal lore. More importantly is the belief of totems and of animism. If that wasn't included in Brother Bear, than I would not think the story was very North American Indian-centric.

To have Kenai transform into a bear in order for him to learn his lesson was very important in the story. To have him remain as such throughout the movie and his final choice is what I admired the most. Having the guardian Eagle is a superb touch to the concept of the totem since they tend to be the topmost image used. How Kenai feels when he received his totem is not all that surprising. While I'm not certain how much of these spiritual lessons is taken from fact, the way it is played is excellent and because of that, I rate this a 9 out of 10.

The Haunting (1963)

More faithful to the book

[3 January 2003]

After finding this gem at the public library's VHS section, I finally received the chance to watch the 'better' version of The Haunting. With what I could recall from reading the original novel (after seeing the modern version), I found this cinematic version infinately better and denser in character exposition than the 1999 version. In this 1963 version, the ending stayed closer to what happened in the novel and that was the definitive moment of The Haunting. I can't say much for the modern version, other than it was an effects film.

What I found original in this 1963 version is that there were some clever uses of lensing effects to heighten the strangeness of Hill House. By adjusting the props in the sets so that they are off by a few degrees, it helps to unsettle the viewer.

I'm hoping for a dvd release so that I can own both versions of the film. In the meantime, read the novel. There were a few details left out.

Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones (2002)

Definately better than Episode One

[7/10 · 17 May 2002]

*minor spoilers warning*

AotC was definately better than Phantom Menace for the underlying plot development, but it paled in comparison when it came to pacing, because I nearly fell asleep a few times and it felt like a long movie. Although, the fact that I didn't get much sleep the night before probably didn't help. ^^; Overall, the second movie was a valient effort in the digital filmmaking medium that Lucas used; there wasn't that many obtuse moments where the CG overwhelmed the characters and the story. At least it was used appropriately to render the vast clone armies and a grandeouse battle, much like Phantom Menace's climatic battle did. Its use to create computer generated aliens still needs a lot more tweaking to make them look like they fit into the shot; most of the times, it isn't... That was one of Phantom Menace's flaw.

In AotC, the flaw was the CG-rendered Yoda. He stood out a few times and while it was required in the climatic battle, this little tyke needed the 3D space to demonstrate his fighting prowness. If the puppet model was used in the closeups, it'd help make the battle a touch more believable than just simply impressionable. This movie is a must for any Star Wars fan as it brings to light the events that caused Act IV to VI to happen, and I look forward to the dvd release to see what was left on the cutting room floor.

Lara Croft: Tomb Raider (2001)

Mostly Fan Appreciation than story focussed.

[16 June 2001]

Being a Red Dwarf fan, I went to see the movie because of Chris

Barrie, not Angelina Jolie. I'm very glad he had a reasonable

amount of screen time than to have him in the background all the

time, with no speaking role.

I have played the first two videogames of Tomb Raider and the

movie does live up to what most fan-boys want, lots of shots with

Lara Croft, her bosum, her legs, and etc. while doing those funky

acrobatic jumps and Tomb Raider videogame style action. The

movie does a great job in making Lara do stuff that is not possible

in the videogame.

As for the rest of the movie, interesting idea. The story should

have focussed more on the mystery of the Illumanati (yet another

reason I wanted to see this movie) than Lara. There were shades

of archeological adventure and an attempt to pay tribute to a

famous scene in Golden Voyage of Sindbad with the multi-armed

Kali-wannabe, but its very weak in comparison. Lost is the

excitement and creepiness that the original Golden Voyage fight

scene had. The finale was even poor, but I won't give away details

on what happens there.

If I had to choose between Mummy Returns and Tomb Raider for

archeological adventure and nonstop action, I prefer Mummy

Returns more.

The Mummy Returns (2001)

a movie with mythical allusions

[10/10 · 10 May 2001]

*vague mild spoiler warning*

First, I must say this movie is not so much a sequel but a

*continuation* of the first movie, even though it takes place 8 years

later. Alone, Mummy Returns does not work; it requires the movie

goer to know the first film well before seeing it.

As for the film itself, it uses some interesting story telling

techniques that further defines Evie's and Rick's character; they

have mythical origins. That is what makes this movie great. Evie

is an important reincarnated Egyptian character from the past and

Rick is the hero who discovers himself (he realizes his origins

near the movie's end) -- this is stuff Joseph Campbell would talk

about. To see them riding that hydrogen balloon-boat was

reminiscent of the solar boat that Ra sails in on his daily journey

across Egypt (i.e. the Sun's daily journey). The technology used to

represent this image was highly appropriate, in my opinion. For

the characters, they are like gods out to do justice and good

against the sea of corruption and evil (which Anubis, Imhotep,

Scorpion King and Anck-Su-Namun represented).

While the CG is not as great as the first movie, there was new stuff

tried out which doesn't quite work. The vast armies of Anubis

warriors and Magi soldiers were fine, but the cg work on the most

basic of tricks (i.e. the oasis jungle as it is being sucked up) just

didn't work for me. It looked too crisp. Perhaps if the spfx people

used traditional special effects methods, the resulting shots would

have looked better. Also, the Rock's final appearance would have

been better if he was actually there for filming instead of a cg

rendered version of him.

The Cell (2000)

Hellraiser in disguise?

[22 October 2000]

While watching this film, I couldn't help but wonder what Clive Barker would think of this film ... The imagery is almost straight out of the Hellraiser movies, with chains dangling about, the preoccupation of the "flesh" and painful pleasures -- common motifs in almost any Barker movie. For its bright visuals and dreamscape, it belongs to a class on its own with tonex in Lovecraftian science and Barkeresque creatures in a movie exploring the mind of a serial killer.

The Blair Witch Project (1999)

Would have been better if the haunted house motif was removed

[25 September 2000]

Based on what I heard: okay, this film was an experimental

piece and it was categorized as 'horror.' I've been a long

time fan of horror films and I've seen a lot of things done in

this media to 'creep' or 'scare' people out. Blair Witch

works in the creep factor because no one, not even the

audience, is in on the joke; also this film was an experiment on psychological terror than anything else. At

its basic level, three filmmakers venture into a forest,

rumored to be haunted by the Blair Witch. What they find

starts their road towards the realm of fear. It is H.P.

Lovecraft who states, "The oldest and strongest emotion of

mankind is fear, and the oldest and strongest kind of fear

is the fear of the unknown. These facts few psychologists

will dispute, and their admitted truth must establish for all

time the genuineness an dignity of the weirdly horrible

tales as a literary form."

Sadly, the movie comes to a big crushing end when traditional cinematic motifs used in the horror genre are

used to bring the movie to its mysterious end. Voices in

the night, children off in the distance, unusual noises and

the haunted house are staples for this genre and the movie

fails when it has to use those methods to create terror. If it

wasn't for the 'haunted house' in the middle of nowhere (i.e.

the woods), I would have enjoyed this movie more. With it

there and the handprints in the house, I had to ask, 'what

the hell?' This movie deserves a wavering thumb because

it works in some levels and is terrible in others.

Highlander: Endgame (2000)

Finally, a worthy sequel

[9/10 · 2 September 2000]

* spoiler alert (?) near the end * I've been a long time Highlander fan ever since I saw the

original movie. I had my reservations about the television

series, but it grew on me -- even though I prefer Conner

more -- and when I heard about the movie, I groaned. It

was the television series going big screen. After seeing it, I

was blown away. Endgame did not feel like a television

episode (my main concern) and with almost most of the original Highlander production team and cast working on

this project, it had the charm that I liked in the original

movie. Also, not only does this film stay faithful to the first

movie it also takes a minimalist approach to using the

ideas presented from the television show, like The Watchers and that an individual (if he/she had the gift)

would become an Immortal after suffering a violent death.

Also, bits of the third movie was suggested in the trailer

with Kell doing magic tricks (i.e. being split in half and

regenerating T2 style) and I'm glad those type of scenes

were taken out. Instead, it was kept simple (i.e. doing

disappearing tricks). If they had Kell doing magic tricks,

then this movie would have failed. Whoever decided to

leave all those scenes in the cutting room floor, congratulations are in order. The fact that this movie does

not deal with The Gathering is important in making this

movie worthy.

Godzilla 2000 (1999)

Definately one of the better dubbed films.

[10/10 · 31 August 2000]

I managed to see the original Japanese language version

of this movie before going to see the dubbed theatrical

release and in comparison, the dub is not as awful as I

thought it'd be. I've seen other dubbed Godzilla films and,

by comparison (and admittedly, they were the older films),

they were worse. I felt that most of the characters (except

for Katagiri ; he had far too many weak moments) worked

and there was emotion than cheese behind it. The key ingredient seemed to be in using English speaking Japanese (?) voice actors (I stayed to see who was used in

the dub-over).

Also, there was very little ad-libbing (based on what I could

understand of the original). The only variants I picked up

on were the insults being made, but that's something that

cannot be translated appropriately.

This film really must be seen on the big screen to feel the

immensity of it all. Watching it on television diminishes the

scope of giant monster movies. Sadly, the only tradeoff is

that people can notice the cheapness of the sets that were

designed to be smashed, bashed and destroyed but it wouldn't be a Godzilla film, without it. :-) I've been a 25-year

fan of the saga, and this film is worthy for the big screen

that it was intended for. Sadly, the US marketing of this film

sucked (Get ready to crumble? yuch). If it were only

marketed better, it definitely would have made it to the top 5

and put Delvin & Emmerich's version to shame. I never

saw their version (refuse to), but to borrow on a Highlander

phase, There can be only one ... and that's Toho's version

of Godzilla.

The Haunting (1999)

terror vs. cgi.

[24 July 1999]

One of the first things that caught my attention was that cgi was going to be used in a horror flic. Okay, this could work, and it did, until it got overblown near the movie's end. The subtler use of cgi was far better than seeing animated statues and ghosts roaming around. Even though I haven't read the novel, the entire story is predictable from start to end and cheap shots were made in establishing terror. The Fall of the House of Usher can easily run circles around The Haunting.

Wild Wild West (1999)

a fine tribute but Will Smith does not deliver.

[5/10 · 3 July 1999]

Having seen the original tv series when I was young, I found the opening credits to be a nice touch; it was a nod to the series that inspired the film. There were various "nods" throughout the film that I liked (music or sets) and despite the "lower" budget that was spent on effects, the budget should have been spent on hiring better script writers or on Will Smith to put in his trademark humor into the movie -- intended or not, the movie was not all that funny. It was more of a plain action film than a Will Smith film and that is where this movie's falling is.

Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)

More myth and less comedy

[7/10 · 20 May 1999]

The Phantom Menace is not a perfect film, in both a fan's perspective and a mythologian's. As a fan, I thought the film could have done better without the computer generated sidekick, Jar Jar, and the Gangan race. I didn't mind the other cg characters or its use in set design as much, because they were used to show a wide variety of aliens existing and give a sense of monolithic proportions, but with Jar Jar, it was more of a thorn in a wonderfully crafted Star Wars universe, whether done by Lucas or Dark Horse Comics. In comparison, the cute bunny-rat like creatures in the Marvel Comics Star Wars universe were more acceptable.

I've never been a fan of computer generated alien races in any film and Star Wars IV to VI never used comedic "skits" to get the audience to laugh. The humor should be indirectly found in the situations the characters find themselves in and in witty script writing. The script had a lot of character development problems. The only character which stood out in both performance and in development is that of Palpatine's.

Also, Lucas developed A New Hope (IV) with Joseph Campbell's Power of Myth series in mind (if not influenced by), and that is what made Acts IV to VI memorable. Instead of building on the myth, in Phantom Menace Lucas presented a history and civilization that has no mythical foundation. "The Force" is a parascience than a mythical essence -- that is what ruined this movie for me. The Force was used in the movie more often in the combat sequences than in any other scene. The Council of Jedi was ruined by having them meet in a concrete room than in a place of Nature. There is no mystique to The Force and only Yoda was able to impress the mystique of The Force than any other character.

The Mummy (1999)

The Mummy is a return to the style of the b-movies.

[9/10 · 12 May 1999]

The Mummy is a wonderful camp-thrill ride that will entertain the viewer. Trying to treat this film seriously is not possible with the humor that is spiced throughout the film and with the campy computer graphic effects that are done on some of the lesser skeletons and mummies running around. For once, the computer graphics are not overblown to ruin the movie's purpose. If The Mummy can be seen as a return to the style of the cheap B-movies, with the dimensionality of the characters and the simple plot, the cg effects are used tactfully to give The Mummy a B-movie feel.

Cleopatra (1963)

Problem with casting...

[18 November 1998]

After watching the first half of the film, all I could think about is how horribly miscast Caesar was. Why an English actor? There were hints of Shakespeare trying to come out, and I was turned off. Cleopatra sort of worked and I do not think the depiction of Egypt is right. Overall, the film starts off slowly and it picks up pace. I was more interested in the pagentry of Cleopatra's entry into Rome and the great part is how Cleopatra's hat is framed against the sphinx, to make it look like the goatee.