JungleBunnyBastard Reviews

Big Man Japan (2007)

This is the biggest "WTF?" movie ever...but that doesn't mean it was terrible.

[8/10 · 14 August 2009]

Big Man Japan is a film unlike no other. An homage to monster movies, a swift mockumentary, and a biting satire. The battle scene with the "Stink Monster" is hilarious, but all the other monsters just weren't funny, but borderline disturbing.

I'm not giving a synopsis anymore with my reviews because that's just boring and you can find out for yourself. But, here's my opinion: this movie is so weird that it gets uncomfortable after a while. At first it was refreshing and awesome, but then, all of a sudden, it got slightly boring and just too weird.

Like I said, the best part of the movie is the fight scene with the Stink Monster and the bizarre ending which has a subtle, but important message within it. I didn't exactly "love" the ending like many people do, but it's still a good ending (and an unexpected one).

Definitely not for all tastes.

An American Affair (2008)

Unconvincing and unrealistic.

[3/10 · 12 August 2009]

Apart from how boring this was, it was also historically inaccurate (apart from Kennedy's assassination), but even still, setting this during that time frame is somewhat distracting.

The main plot is generic, recycled and unrealistic to say the least. What are the chances of this kid actually coming across all the events that happen in this story? Not bloody likely.

Still, though, there were a couple good scenes (the ending was surprisingly good), but just not enough to save a mediocre film. Mediocre, but watchable at least. I'd be more willing to give this a three and a half, but unfortunately I have to pick either three or four here on IMDb...so I'm leaning more towards a three.

Taken (I) (2008)

Good action movie? No. Good movie? Hell no.

[3/10 · 12 August 2009]

Yeah, as much as I'm gonna get flamed for this, I didn't enjoy this unrealistic, boring excuse for an action movie one bit. There were several scenes that were done well (certain shots of Paris), but other than that this was pretty generic.

Liam Neeson tries his best, but is obviously not working with good material so his skills seem pretty damn limited. It amazes me that this movie is so popular (7.9 rating on IMDb). I kept looking at my watch waiting for it to end. I'm giving it three stars just to be generous because the girl who played the daughter did a good job.

This could've been better with it's source material, but come on. At least try to make a good movie. Still, this isn't as bad as many other movies I've seen.

The Great Buck Howard (2008)

Mediocre but light-hearted comedy.

[5/10 · 5 August 2009]

I wouldn't say this is a disappointing film because I really wasn't expecting much, I just wish there was more. As great as John Malkovich is in his role as Buck Howard, I didn't think the story was anything special (dull and uninteresting is another way to describe it) and that it was emotionally distant.

That said, I will give it this: it does keep your attention despite having a contrived and somewhat predictable script, but it's still fun to watch. I'd recommend this for the performers and not necessarily it's story. I just wish they could've done more with it instead of keeping the audience at bay.

Coraline (2009)

Good, but not exactly the masterpiece everyone makes it out to be.

[5/10 · 3 August 2009]

Yes, I know I may get flamed for this, but Coraline was an okay kids movie and was better than average. Out of all the films being released in 2009, this is the best kids movie I've seen (I also haven't seen Up yet).

First, the visuals are fantastic. The storyline? Tightly woven and very strong. Characters? Creative, interesting, and very fleshed-out...except for Coraline. I couldn't stand her (especially at the beginning, though she did get better) and Dakota Fanning's awful voice work nearly ruined it for me. Everyone else's voice acting was near perfect, except for hers. The major drawback to this film was the casting of Fanning in the lead role.

I'm not saying I don't like this movie, I do. It's just nothing special to me, either. I love dark fables like this, but I don't know. I just feel like it's a bit overrated. Still, though, it's better than average and is definitely one of the better films of the first half of 2009.

He's Just Not That Into You (2009)

Enjoyable, but nothing substantial or even memorable.

[4/10 · 3 August 2009]

Yeah, I didn't hate this movie and yeah, I was even surprised a little bit by how engaging it was. But, the bottom line is that it has too many damn stories that really aren't interesting in the first place. Only about two of them were and that was the cheating husband and the bartender romance.

The whole time I was watching this I kept getting the feeling that maybe it was trying to be deeper than it actually was and was going step-by-step in the formulaic rule book of romance clichés. There weren't many, but damn, by the end of the movie (over two hours long) I felt exhausted. I enjoyed it for the first half and was ready to see the outcome for all the stories, but they just became dull and uninteresting after a while.

It's not a totally bad movie (I wouldn't even call it that), but it's not one you should jump up and see right away. If you're bored and can't find anything else to watch at the video store or Netflix or wherever the f*ck you rent movies, give this a try. It's not perfect, but it'll give you the right edge for a boring day.

Good work by the cast, though. Each person did their part flawlessly. Except for maybe Drew Barrymore. I just don't like her for some reason.

The Haunting in Connecticut (2009)

Another boring, awfully clichéd teen horror flick.

[2/10 · 29 July 2009]

I don't know about you, but I'm getting pretty sick and tired of these watered down, poorly written teen horror films that seem to come out nearly every other week. The worst thing about it is that they don't even try anymore.

This movie in particular, The Haunting in Connecticut, is really just a series of jump scares and over-the-top musical queues to let you know to "be afraid" at that exact scene. It's ridiculous, and it's not just this movie that does that, either.

I'm tired of these crap films making it into theaters now when truly great movies are thrown beneath the radar. It pisses me off, along with how stupid this movie is. Really, how did Virginia Madsen go from being an Oscar nominated actress in Sideways to hamming it up in a worse-than-a-hammer-production teen horror movie?

Street Fighter: The Legend of Chun-Li (2009)

Horrible, boring action movie.

[1/10 · 29 July 2009]

Dude, I can't even begin to describe how awful this movie is. The inconsistent and dull story, ridiculous action scenes, terrible acting, horrid dialog, just...everything.

I don't even want to waste my time writing about this crap. The only thing I can really say is to stay as far away from this as you possibly can. If you have a friend who says: "Hey, let's watch this just for fun," firmly tell him "NO" like he just offered to jerk you off with barbed wire. Of course, that would probably be much more enjoyable than Street Fighter.

Bottom line: this boring little turd of a film will make you want to kill yourself for spending money on it.

The Edge of Love (2008)

Boring and emotionally unsatisfying.

[3/10 · 25 July 2009]

I just got done watching The Edge of Love (by the way, this is one of the worst titles so far this year) and it felt like a chore. Watching Keira Knightly's unlikable, skeleton-looking character made me cringe even more throughout the coarse of the film.

It took me four nights to watch this it was so boring. The only good thing about it was Cillian Murphy. He's always good/believable and is severely under looked in many films. This, however, was just not good enough for him.

Apart from the unlikable characters, boring storyline, the plot was also emotionally unsatisfying. I felt like I spent my time watching this for nothing (which I did). I should have done the smart thing and turned it off, but I kept it on out of respect for Cillian Murphy and the great cinematography.

The Education of Charlie Banks (2007)

Despite great acting and an interesting story, it feels like it's lacking in certain areas.

[6/10 · 20 July 2009]

The Education of Charlie Banks is an above decent film and perhaps one of the better movies to come out during the first half of 2009.

The interesting concept and storyline kept me interested, along with the great performances of Jesse Eisenberg, Chris Marquette, and especially Jason Ritter. But, for some reason, it lacks chemistry with the actors and the overall feel to it.

First time director Fred Durst (yes, the vocalist from crappy rock band Limp Bizkit) managed to impress me, which is a feat I never thought would happen. He captures the essence and feel of the 70's and early 80's perfectly with a great attention to detail.

Overall, this is a good, if uneven, movie; but it's just really nothing special.

Fanboys (2009)

Laughs are too mild and far apart for the film to be overall entertaining.

[3/10 · 15 July 2009]

With a plot like this, it could've turned out to be a nice, subtle comedy. But, like always, the filmmakers decided to make this into a crude road comedy. And that really sucks because there really wasn't anything funny happening in the film. Just a couple of mild laughs every now and then, but that's too few to sustain an entire film.

Pretty much the only saving grace was Kristin Bell's character. Now, she was also very fine to look at and made the film more watchable (this would have received a 2-star rating from me if it wasn't for her). A lot happens, but not a lot is explained. Not to mention it's consistent, unrealistic plot points.

So, really, this isn't something you haven't seen before. It's like "Road Trip" with "Star Wars" geeks thrown in. But, like I said, Kristin Bell's character really makes it worthwhile. I won't ever watch the film again because, frankly, it was surprisingly boring.

Two Lovers (2008)

Well filmed and well acted, but emotionally unsatisfying.

[4/10 · 15 July 2009]

I just finished watching this film and had thought to myself: "Wow, that ending really p!ssed me off." And here's why: Leonard (Joaquin Phoenix's character) is only staying with the girl because Gwyneth Paltrow's character doesn't want to be with him. It's unfair for something like that to happen to such a likable character.

This film, Two Lovers, is one of the better reviewed films out there this year, but I honestly think it would've been a lot better if it focused more on one romance instead of both because I never fully understood why they were in love with one another in the first place. Still, this film is better than most that have come out so far. This is pretty much all I have to say about Two Lovers - it was decent, but nothing special.

Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009)

Since I'm not a fan of Harry Potter, I can't really give this a fair review...but I'll try.

[5/10 · 15 July 2009]

Okay, here's the deal: I'm not a Harry Potter fan at all. I never got into the books and the first movie just bored the hell out of me. So, since I'm supposed to be reviewing every movie in 2009, I dreaded having to see this. Luckily I got it out of the way rather quickly last night at a midnight showing (the theater was filled to the brim with "Potter Nerds").

My friends dragged me to see this and I'm kind of glad they did. It wasn't a bad movie, I was just lost. I didn't understand the underlying hints, the plot, the characters, anything. And you know what? That's fine. I haven't seen the other movies, so I kind of had it coming.

I can only give this a five because from an artistic point of view it was very well done, but from a viewer's standpoint, I just wasn't satisfied. Thus, I cannot give a fair review - only and honest one. Plus, being in a theater with rabid Harry Potter fans was hilarious.

Friday the 13th (2009)

Disappointing entry into one of my favorite franchises.

[2/10 · 13 July 2009]

I grew up in the early 2000s watching the Friday the 13th series. I loved every single one of those stupid movies (yes, even Jason X and Jason Goes to Hell). They weren't good movies, but they were fun as hell to watch.

This remake really got me down. First of all, the kills were pretty unimpressive - especially with the lack of makeup used on them but instead CGI blood and gore was used.

The picture is so dark most of the film that it's hard to tell what's happening on screen most of the time. Not to mention the standard slasher film formula this film follows. Instead of doing a remake, they should've just done another sequel. That would've made me extremely happy instead of serving us this crap.

Remakes are like the bubonic plague. No one wants them, but they still keep coming. As long as directors like Marcus Nispel and producers like the bag of sh!t Michael Bay keep making movies, then that's exactly what we're gonna get.

Confessions of a Shopaholic (2009)

It's 104 minutes long, but it felt like it was three times longer than Lawrence of Arabia.

[2/10 · 13 July 2009]

Yeah, it really did feel like it was that long. I kept squirming in my seat and nodding off. I kept checking the time on my DVD player and kept sighing in disbelief.

For starters, this film is just plain boring. Everything about it bored me: the recycled plot devices, the uninteresting characters, the unimaginative dialogue, the clichéd scenarios, everything. It was just extremely un-enjoyable (I know that's not a word but it's the best way I can describe this movie).

I kept it from receiving a one star rating because you can tell the actors/actresses are trying really hard to make the film at least watchable. Sadly, we are let down and it's not their fault.

It's really just got a dumb plot as well: a working class girl keep spending and can't stop and end up being in debt. There's really more to that than just that sentence, but I don't want to bore you.

What's really embarrassing (and yet subtly intriguing) is that Entertainment Weekly's film critic Owen Gleiberman gave this film an A- rating. That puzzles me because I really couldn't see how he could give this movie that much praise and give so many others such crap (I won't name the titles for the sake of argument).

Oh, and by the way, I wasn't dissing on "Lawrence of Arabia" in my summary. That's actually one of my favorite movies. I was just comparing lengths. I could watch "Lawrence of Arabia" over and over again whereas it would take me hours just to watch "Confessions of a Shopaholic" because I would have to keep pausing and getting up to do something else for a little while then reluctantly returning to my seat to finish watching. No one should feel like that.

Bottom line: movies about clothes suck (The Devil Wears Prada, Confessions of a Shopaholic, etc.).

Push (2009)

Better than "Jumper" but that's not really saying much.

[4/10 · 10 July 2009]

Honestly, I was surprised at the quality of this movie. I wasn't surprised, however, at the lack of emotion and chemistry between the actors and the quick-cut action sequences that us Americans are far too used to.

The story, as needlessly complicated as it is and doesn't need to be, is about a bunch of X-Men-like freaks with mind powers that are being hunted down by others like them that are part of a "Division." It's never actually clear as to why they do what they do except that it started with the Nazis in WWII. Where would we be without the good old Nazis to take the fall for everything bad that we do? Anyway, that's pretty much the ridiculous parts of the movie. The setting and some of the little tricks the "pushers" do are pretty cool.

Not really explaining what all the idiotic names are for most of the people chasing after the main characters means is pretty...well...idiotic. The scribes do try to change it up as much as they can to avoid clichés and they do for the most part, but, personally I think this would've been a lot better if it hadn't tried so hard to be an action flick but an intellectual sci-fi thriller.

By the way, I compared this to "Jumper" in my summary because everyone is pretty much saying that this is a rip-off of "Jumper" or just a mere sequel. I assure you that "Push" isn't even in the same ball park as that crap-fest we all know as "Jumper."

Knowing (2009)

I rented it "knowing" that it would suck.

[3/10 · 10 July 2009]

Okay, I have to admit that I did slightly enjoy the film up until the end (I agree with pretty much everyone on this website that the ending sucked really bad and destroyed the film).

Nicolas Cage didn't bother me for once in his career, the visual effects were great, the sound was good, it had an intriguing plot...and I guess the filmmakers just got a little conceded and probably thought: "Hell, if we can make a movie this good it doesn't really matter how good the last half hour should be. Let's just throw in something that doesn't make sense. Like some aliens. We'll pull a Crystal Skull and just toss in some aliens. Yeah, that won't p!ss anybody off."

Nicolas Cage plays a science professor who discovers a piece of paper in a time capsule that has a bunch of numbers written on it that predict every major disaster from 1959 up until 2009 (where the world eventually ends just in time for Nicky Cage to figure it all out...how convenient).

This movie just p!ssed me off. I was actually thinking to myself: "Maybe this movie isn't as bad as everyone says it is. Maybe they're just hating on a Nicolas Cage movie." But, alas, they're right. That concludes my review. First two thirds were good/decent, last act was an abysmal pile of crap.

The Unborn (2009)

Unintetionally Hilarious

[2/10 · 9 July 2009]

Oh, dude. I just finished watching The Unborn and I can say that it's about the funniest thing I've seen in a while (not to mention the pure idiocy that comes with the "humor").

The Unborn in about a ghost (of course, right? What PG-13 rated horror film doesn't have ghosts nowadays?) that wants to be reborn through his sister (?!) and decided to kill everyone that gets close to her. I guess because that would help? The inconsistencies and the laughable "scares" pretty much make this an entertaining comedy rather than a serious horror film. Also, this was written and directed by a co-writer of The Dark Knight. I guess he shouldn't make another movie unless he has Christopher Nolan to cancel him out.

Practically every scene in this film is useless and nothing was clearly explained (why did she keep seeing the potato bugs everywhere?). That and the ever-popular musical score of string plucks and violin screeches that occur every time something pops out of nowhere. I'm so sick of stupid horror movies, please make something good for once, Hollywood. The only horror films worth watching now aren't even in English. It's pretty sad when you have to depend on the foreigners to give you a film that won't treat you like an idiot for two hours (I know this movie was only 88 minutes, but still...it seemed like it too forever).

And for some reason Gary Oldman is in this. What the hell? Again, this movie is just so mind-numbingly stupid and laughable that I would really prefer to just forget about this garbage and move on.

Phoebe in Wonderland (2008)

Good film, but it feels like it's missing something.

[6/10 · 4 July 2009]

Despite great efforts from the cast (excluding most of the child actors) and having it's heart in the right place, I can't help but feel like this little indie film is pushing buttons that don't necessarily need to be pushed.

The inconsistency with certain elements kind of let me down and confused me. There were just so many open doors that were never closed or explored. Whether this is intentional or not it's still nevertheless unsatisfying.

This isn't a bad film and it features a good performance by Elle Fanning (which surprised me because I can't stand her sister Dakota). I'd say to give this a chance, but don't buy it without viewing it first.

The Pink Panther 2 (2009)

I would say it's a waste of a talented cast, but they kind of got themselves into it by signing on anyway.

[2/10 · 3 July 2009]

Yeah, I just watched The Pink Panther 2. What an endurance test. It doesn't help much either that the only somewhat humorous moment happens at the very beginning so you really don't have much to look forward to (and it's a scene with only John Cleese in it).

I guess Steve Martin's accent is supposed to sound fake for it to be funny or it just sounds bad because he's trying. Either way just listening to him talk was mind-numbing. Oh, I keep forgetting to outline the plots in my reviews. Okay, here I go: Steve Martin's character has to find the pink panther diamond once again and gets himself and the rest of the cast in all sorts of groan-inducing gags that would make the great Peter Sellers roll over in his grave. The inconsistencies with the plot just made little to no sense and made the entire film bleakly pointless and instantly forgettable. Please, don't let there be a Pink Panther 3. Don't do it, if not for me then out of respect for Peter Sellers.

This was a great waste of it's talented cast: John Cleese, Jeremy Irons, Alfred Molina, Jean Reno. I would also say Steve Martin but then I found out that he was one of the douche bags who wrote this turd of a film.

Outlander (2008)

Very clichéd for such an original sci-fi epic.

[4/10 · 3 July 2009]

Let me start by saying the great things about this movie. The creature effects, the creature itself, the very original plot, the Norwegian scenery...but that ends there.

What could have been an amazing, emotional sci-fi epic turned in every predictable cliché and character outline. It wasn't necessary and I found myself extremely bored by it. Not to mention that the horrid performances (especially by Caviezel) helped tune me out.

A good story, a great creature, bad camera work (I've had enough of the "shaky-cam" crap in action films), and clichéd writing. Such a disappointment, yet I can't help but think of so many other filmmakers who could've made this little sci-fi indie a cult classic (auteurs along the lines of Peter Jackson or Guillermo Del Toro...hell, even Tim Burton could've done it better).

So far 2009 just keeps getting my hopes down.

Public Enemies (2009)

Decent, but disappointing.

[5/10 · 3 July 2009]

My high expectations for this film were nearly through the roof. But, the actual film itself is a bit of a drag.

The story of John Dillinger's reign of crime in America's depression era is a good story that needs to be told...well. I'm a fan of Michael Mann and I was excited to see him doing this film. I loved Collateral, Heat, The Insider especially, so this was a real treat in my eyes.

But, like ever so often, I was let down. The performances were good (even the irritating, wooden, douche-looking Christian Bale didn't annoy me). Fabulous costume design and art direction were the high points of this film.

I've gotta keep this one short. I'm too tired to write on, but I will leave you with this: see it, enjoy it, but don't see it again. I'm still relishing in the disappointing aftermath of this film. It wasn't entirely terrible, though. Oh, you see? Now I'm repeating myself. I hate writing reviews for so-so films - there's really not too much to say about them except for the fact that they're decent.

Inkheart (2008)

Fantasy again breaks it's own rules.

[3/10 · 25 June 2009]

The wonderful thing about doing fantasy, sci-fi and horror is that you get to make your own rules as long as you explain them thoroughly and offer explanations every now and then. This little fantasy film seems to rely on breaking it's set rules (thus tossing out the audience's suspense of disbelief) and making up new ones as they go along (you'll find yourself thinking on how to solve the conflicts faster than the characters actually do).

It pretty much just drags on like that until the end of the film when someone actually does something useful. Other than that, it's tedious and time wasting. The characters have potential, but there's too many and aren't exactly fleshed out. Even the actors look bored.

A cheesy, boring children's fantasy film comes out every year like clockwork in both quarters of the year ever since the first Chronicles of Narnia came out (and if you want to get real technical, then count in the far superior Lord of the Rings films). I'm just tired of it. They're not interesting, they're not fun, they're just - for lack of a better word - LAME.

Hollywood needs more original screenplays because, ironically, the fantasy films that we get now are unoriginal and clichéd.

Notorious (2009)

Good biopic, but seems to focus too much on the negative side of Nortious B.I.G.'s career.

[6/10 · 24 June 2009]

I don't have too much time right now, so I'll make this quick. I watched this film with low expectations and I got better than what I had in mind. It has fantastic performances by every actor (especially Jamal Woolard as Biggie), but with that said, I'm afraid that this film just focused too much on the negative side of Biggie, rather than his main contributions.

Of course, the music is great, the cinematography is pretty good, it's well directed and extremely well acted (that's twice I've said that, stop me the next time I bring it up), but there's just such a negative flow to the whole film and that pretty much brought it down from my original rating of 8 to a 6.

Yes, it did exceed my expectations, but not by much. Right when I felt that I was impressed, I was let down tremendously, but not enough to give it a bad review. It's a good movie and deserves to be recognized, but I just really wished that they had focused much more on the positive side of Biggie's life rather than all the negative.

By the way, I'm not a fan of rap music so this is a totally neutral review.

Food, Inc. (2008)

Informative and disturbing, but slow and preachy.

[5/10 · 24 June 2009]

This is one of those films that could have been excellent, but just wasn't. It was almost there, but then they decided to send an array of preachy messages just before the end credits, which pretty much angered me. I don't like movies that tell me what to do or how to do it. I don't mind liberal films, just don't talk down to me like I'm a child. (With that said, conservatives anger me off as well.)

Food, Inc. is about how our food industry pretty much screws us and smaller food companies over, to keep it simple. It's first half is actually very fun and insightful to watch. After that, the seemingly forever lasting second half clipped along at a snail's pace and kept us in the dark about certain issues that surfaced, but weren't explored.

In a way, it's important. It's important to know what's in your food and how it gets there and what happens in the process. What isn't important (nor is it necessary) to try to influence the viewer with words telling us what we should do. In my eyes, that's just not a good thing to do in a film. The glacially slow second half would have been forgivable if they hadn't done what they did just before the end credits. Other than that, see this film. You might learn something.