DBLurker Reviews

24 Hours to Live (2017)

Finally, Hawke is back into action role.

[7/10 · 25 July 2018]

I am a Ethan Hawke fan and have pretty much seen every movie of his (Sinister is my favorite). But I've felt like he doesn't go action movies much and if you've seen movies like Assault on Precinct 13 or Purge, you know he can do action.

So yeah, 24 hours might not be ground-breaking plot-wise, but it does action well. Story is cliched but well acted. Hawke plus other caste, all good, except for the Chinese actress who can't act and is there cause Hollywood movies are now funded by Chinese and need to make money over there.

I think action is definitely what keeps this movie flowing and makes it worth sitting through. A good popcorn flick.

Den of Thieves (2018)

Den of Heat

[5/10 · 24 July 2018]

So I saw this movie right after watching Heat for the first time few days ago.

This movie blatantly tries to copy Heat. Like REALLY copy it. Scenes, moments, shootouts, the director barely tried to do anything different. And in what he DOES do different, the result is.. average.

First things first. The acting is horrible. The only person trying to act is Butler, but that's to be expected. In Heat, you had two opposing factions, with actors like Pacino, Niro and Kilmer making you feel love/hate even for the criminals. Hell, eeven the families and love interests have a part to pay in Heat.

In Den of Thieves? The only character you care a "bit" about is Butler's. But even then, his character is mostly awful so there isn't much to like, compared to Pacino's character who was shown to be a mere human, despite being a dedicated detective machine. Meanwhile in DoT, you have awful actors like 50 Cent who can't act their way out of a paper bag.

Then the heist. It's alright. But relies way too much on luck and coincidences. You'd think that a movie 23 years after Heat, trying to copy it, would try to improve upon the formula. But they just settle for same and even less.

I think the biggest problem I had was that these "marines" felt like a bunch of amateurs when handling weapons. Remember the ending gunfight in Heat and how professional the robbers looked when handling weapons. Val Kilmer especially looked smooth and their handling felt so natural. In DoT? They feel so amateur, especially the cops. The ending fun-fight was just them shooting a bunch of cars instead of a bunch of people (which is a miracle since cars were still full of people in most shots).

Overall, I felt like the director could've gone beyond Heat and made it something more. Instead he just settled on copying Heat.. badly.

Going to give it 5/10 since I think this is still a step up compared to most such movies and it wasn't THAT bad that I would give it less than a 5. It's a popcorn flick. Will not leave a lasting impact like Heat did.

Infini (2015)

Is it like Event Horizon? No, but better than Alien Covenant.

[6/10 · 1 July 2018]

I watched this movie after somebody said it's similar to Event Horizon. Is it? Well, it's in the same vein, using inter-dimensional travel to create the horror of "unknown".. but the "horror" isn't really that horrifying.

Don't get me wrong, it's still far more competent and entertaining than the pile of sh*t that Prometheus and Alien: Covenant were. Just don't expect it to match Event Horizon.

Primarily because, like with most directors/writers, in Infini, they make the mistake of trying to explain too much. Even bigger mistake is to show the enemy itself, but then it'd have to be a psychological horror, which this ain't.

Also, I would've preferred they had ended the movie when the hero "wakes up" (not a spoiler) instead of them showing more. It'd left the ending up the interpretation, like they say they wanted to.. but I don't think it does. Kinda explains pretty clearly what happened and who changed and why. Kinda disappointed in that.

Oh well, still a good movie. Worth watching.

Lethal Weapon (2016–2019)

Clayne Crawford (Riggs) Fired from the show, it's dead.

[5/10 · 14 June 2018]

Having enjoyed all Lethal Weapon movies, I finally decided to give this show a try (having ignored it up until now) and surprise surprise, it was pretty good. Binge watched season 1 and 2 over this whole week. Fun.

Then went online to see when Season 3 was coming, only to find that they fired Crawford, the perfect Riggs, over some hilarious drama most like caused by drama queen Wayans.

So this is it. The show is dead. I would've given it 8/10 but without THIS Riggs? I seriously doubt it you wanna watch more of this show.

Mostly cause apparently, Seann William Scott, is supposed to replace Crawford and Scott is only good in comedy roles. I've seen his acting, which is on the same level as Wayans and both can ONLY do comedy (average). So now you'll have two actors who are only good at comedy, playing both roles in the same manner. That's just a disaster, even thinking about it.

No thanks, moving on. Watch season 1 and 2, they are 8/10. Then move on to a new show.

Hangman (II) (2017)

Boring killer, boring plot..

[1/10 · 15 May 2018]

I'll be honest, I had no idea WTF Hangman game was, it's not common outside West. The only reason I saw the movie was because of Urban and Pacino, two of my favorite actors.

So basically, I saw the whole movie without researching "Hangman" (the game), expecting there to be a short scene where they would casually mention what Hangman game was played like (can be easily done without making it look like they're explaining it to the audience). So if you aren't a Westerner or have no idea what this game is, most of the stuff the killer does seems more ridiculous than usual. After I watched the movie, I searched on YouTube to see what Hangman game was about (there's like a one min video explaining it, that's all the movie needed as well). This is whole new level of sloppy.

ANYWAY, what's hilarious is that after knowing what Hangman game is like, this movie seems even dumber. First of all, I had no idea where they were making most of the connections from. They seem to be assuming a lot of things and Pacino's character is freakin Sherlock Holmes so he's always right about things. In-fact, dialogues are so pointlessly trying to over-complicate things, that you just zone out and stop caring (kinda like the actors who are there just for a paycheck).

The murders are just ridiculously dumb. Why does the killer pick Hangman game to kill people? I don't know, THEY don't know, it's never explained. Killer is played by a unimpressive actor who only ONCE makes a appearance in the middle of the movie, until the end. And that middle appearance is nothing special. He seems to hang around every murder and our two heroes are so incompetent that they can't take down a serial killer who keeps showing up at every crime. Hell, in one scene there are cops everywhere next to the murder victim and the killer is casually walking around for dramatic effect.

Skipping right to the ending, it's the dumbest thing I've ever seen. There is no resolution cause the director thought that this turd would get a sequel, somehow. Knowing Hollywood, it probably will.

Why does this movie have 5/10 rating here? This should be about 1/10.

Barry (2018–2023)

Right balance of witty and gory..

[8/10 · 9 May 2018]

Writing this review after watching the seventh episode of the first season. In-fact, I started watching this a day ago, went through all episodes fast.

This show balances witty banter with serious moments quite well. Unlike terrible shows like Riverdale, where you're just wondering "WTF are they going for exactly?", Barry actually gets it right. The comedy itself isn't overdone (except for few moments, which are still fine) and action is delivered at steady pace.

Really trying hard not to spoil the show, so go and watch it. It's good.

Riverdale (2017–2023)

Crime, Drama, Mystery - Where's the Crime and Mystery?

[1/10 · 17 March 2018]

This show is filed under "Crime, Drama, Mystery" and 4 episodes in, the "Crime and Mystery" parts are covered in less than 3-4 minutes per episode.

Not kidding. This is typical teenage drama trash with supermodels pretending to be average kids and talking about boys and love 24/7 with 4 minutes per episode dedicated to a crappy murder mystery that you stop caring about after the first episode. The fact that most of these actors (I think only the girl playing Betty so far is good at acting) can't act their way out of the paper-bag and the writer's throwing in SJW crap where Josie and the Pussycats suddenly start lecturing about Black Lives Matter to Archie, has made the first four episodes a pain to sit through.

I grew up with occasionally reading Archie and Jughead comics, never hated them but always enjoyed the light-hearted comedy. Turning it all into a "thriller" sounds like a interesting take, until you sit through this garbage. They've taken out all comedy, thrown in trash-load of SJW preaching, teenage love triangle, school life bull with 3-4 minutes of some crime happening ("Oh noes, somebody broke into a office, WHAT A CRIME TO END THE EPISODE WITH, AMIRIGHT VIEWERS??" - Writers and Director).

I should've known better than to trust reviewers on IMDB who non ironically give shows 10/10 and praise them in their reviews.

Ironclad (2011)

Entertaining but I am afraid the camera man was having a seizure..

[7/10 · 22 February 2018]

I enjoy James Purefoy and Paul Giamatti's acting, so yes, I indeed enjoyed this movie. It isn't historically accurate, but it's still entertaining since the actors are good and I especially enjoyed the part where the script gives a lot of screen-time to every character. Character development of anyone other than the protagonist, usually never happens in Hollywood movies. So I was surprised how this movie made me actually care for and even like everyone fighting to protect the keep.

That said, I am afraid the poor camera man was suffering from Epilepsy since every action scene involves camera shaking around and not staying at a character for more than 0.5 seconds. The art of editing and shooting an action scene, is lost on these people.

Anyway, annoyance with the action scenes aside, the real gold is in the moments spent with the characters. Even King John is weirdly likeable.

21 Jump Street (2012)

Meh..

[3/10 · 20 February 2018]

Go watch "The Other Guys" is you want a good funny cop movie.

21 Jump Street is just average. Now I've not seen the TV show it's based on (will do now, knowing Depp is the lead) but I am gonna just throw a wild guess that Depp is far better at acting than Jonah Hill.

Seriously, the guy isn't funny. Even Tatum has better comedic timing and expressions than Hill.

Average movie. Didn't HATE it, but it wasn't exactly "hilarious".

Alien: Covenant (2017)

Even Prometheus wasn't this bad..

[1/10 · 15 February 2018]

You know, I can write a long review detailing the brain cells I lost while watching this pile of turd, but... OK, how about a multiple choice question instead? Those are fun.

OK, here it goes..

-----------------------------------------------------------

Traveling through the uncharted space, you and your crew of TOP scientific and politically correct minds, come across an alien planet. You decide to explore this planet which you've never heard of, never even seen or done any tests on. What do you do?

A) Use the UAV's to recon the world, collect data (air, soil, whatever) from the comfort of your ship out in the space. Make sure the place doesn't have any hostile life forms or diseases that can wipe you and your crew out. When done with the tests, you send in a small team in protective suits and proper shielded helmets on a small shuttle. BUT, even then, you send in the rovers out first, or the drones, to survey ahead. Only after all that you let your team step out of the shuttle and begin exploring.

OR

B) Take majority of your crew in the space shuttle down to the surface of the alient planet while wearing casual clothes with no protective gear, not even helmets. You and your team is now ready to explore the world armed with humor, womyn power, faith in god and guns.

-----------------------------------------------------------

If you picked B, congrats, Ridley Scott will soon give you a call to pen the sequel of Alien: Covenant. B is also basically when you realize, this movie is going to be a bigger sh-itshow than Prometheus.

Enough said.

The Alienist (2018–2020)

Ancient CSI.. same old same old..

[3/10 · 12 February 2018]

Someone in the boardroom was thinking hard, "People love those fake CSI shows, but we've tried everything, magical bone recreation, fashionable CSI models, Navy crime stuff, medium.. but WAIT, what we haven't tried is a period piece, with ancient CSI and.. wait what? Somebody did that as well? Ah screw it.. throw in dead tranny children." And this is how this show came into being. Except it's based on a novel, but still, nothing mind blowing.

TBH, only reason I saw the first three episodes was for Luke Evans, and he isn't even a main character. Hell, even the main character doesn't feel like a main character since everything he can do, just a random "STRONG WOMYN" with no degree can do.

Speaking of STRONG WOMYN. Dakota Fanning still can't act. To make it worse, the idea of a "strong woman" for the feminist directors of this show means, "I don't like to dress girly, I smoke, I drink and try to be as butch as possible, WOHOO FEMINISM." Only three episodes in and I am already hating her character. Worst part is, they are turning her into a main character who can magically do everything (it'll happen, you know it) the men can. Her character doesn't even match the character in the book.

Not saying other characters are any better. This whole show so far is a cliche-fest with terrible edgy writing with CGI eye-holes in children. Hell, after the first episode, they don't even bother showing the bodies of the victims properly (I guess CGI for that is way too expensive). They just casually mention "children are being killed all over the place".. well, where? When? We only see two, are there more and how exactly is this killer going around butchering so many in so little time when the show itself, shows him taking his time (as in, weeks) with ONE CHILD.

Meh. I'll probably try to watch all 10 episodes. But if this show gets renewed, then it sure as hell isn't because it's good. Probably will be renewed cause of star power.

Batman: Gotham by Gaslight (2018)

Could've been more..

[5/10 · 1 February 2018]

Even though I enjoyed it, it felt like they were just trying to change the setting and characters, a bit (except for Batman).

Instead of going all nuts with characters, introducing new villain and gadgets, the whole movie relied on tired old "JACK THE RIPPER" bit that countless movies and TV shows have used. The only gadget you'll see Batman use is the claw, except more "Victorian" in design.

Overall, they could've done more, gone farther with the idea and the setting. But they settled for.. so-so..

Also, would it kill you to change the character of Batman every now and then DC? I know you've done it few times, but it's either "he is so nice" or "omg he kills people too". But that's it.

While we're at it, introduce new villains. Could've had a supernatural villain or a mechanical one, using Steampunk style. But nope.. JACK THE RIPPER HURRDURR!

Anyway, this is one of those movies which you won't come back to after the first viewing. Watch it, and move on.

The Poughkeepsie Tapes (2007)

A killer aided by camera cuts and unlimited camera battery-life..

[3/10 · 10 January 2018]

This whole mockumentary has interviews with profilers, cops and detectives praising this killer as elusive and dangerously smart at evading and misleading the authorities.

Except the tapes themselves show him as a careless individual who almost get's caught by two little girls selling cookies.

Ignoring the unbelievably tame tapes themselves (I don't really find "gore" scary when it's overdone), the fact that the killer goes around recording everything, even at his own crime-scene with cops around, would get him caught REALLY fast. The killer is basically like one of those attention-seekers who keep recording themselves and posting it on Twitter and Instagram for the world to see. And what exactly was he recording on? That camera's battery lasts longer than most cameras these days.

I got hyped up with people recommending this movie, and it's a dud with a LOT of "logic" (it is trying to present itself as a documentary) issues that can't even be ignored cause of "suspension of disbelief". That excuse doesn't work when you are making a documentary and pretending to have a story of a serial killer that is the smartest killer every born, while he's saved by camera cuts and fade-outs instead of a proper explanation/excuse.

Waste of time.

Bright (I) (2017)

Surprise surprise, Critics are wrong, AGAIN..

[10/10 · 31 December 2017]

You can find a critic for everything. People actually make a living out of it. Doesn't matter how wrong you are, you get a page or a spot on some overhyped rag to rate someone else's hard work. This is also what we all do in User Reviews section on IMDB. Take it all with a grain of salt, it's a personal opinion afterall.

That said, as I've been binge watching Lethal Weapon series (Beverly Cop next), I was pleasantly surprised with Bright. It's basically Lethal Weapon with a human and a orc cop instead of a white cop and a black cop.

There wasn't a single scene or dialogue in this movie where I felt it wasn't needed or went on for too long. The comedy is just right, not overdone, and action accompanies the story, done just right. Will Smith and Joel Edgerton actually have a good chemistry and the writer has definitely done a good job creating Orc culture (as inspired by American Black/Latino culture, tbh). It all just works. I wasn't even looking forward to this movie, but I'm looking forward to the sequel now.

So do what I do, ignore the critics, and watch the. Make up your own damn mind.

10/10 (would've given it 8/10 but others are voting this movie down unfairly, so 10).

Jack Reacher: Never Go Back (2016)

Hmm, well..

[5/10 · 8 December 2017]

I gave the first Jack Reacher movie 8/10, definitely worth watching. For this, I kept thinking about the issues I had with this movie, after I was done watching. Initially, I gave this movie 7/10, then went down to 6/10 and eventually settled on 5/10.

The thing is, this movie is just.. OK. First movie introduced you to Jack Reacher and his style (I have not read the books) and to be honest, Jack Reacher is a toned down Ethan Hunt (Mission Impossible), solving military cases. But it worked and the first movie was entertaining.

Never Go Back, does the same thing, but tries too hard to make Jack Reacher "cool", especially with the opening setup which made no sense (the trailer IS the opening) and just happened cause it was supposed to make Jack look cool.. I guess to the audience who haven't seen the first movie? But whatever, moving on, he suddenly has a love interest and a supposed child. Which turns most of the movie into a sitcom with action scenes severely feeling "meh" despite probably doing more than the first movie. No idea who they were aiming for when they picked this book to make a movie out of (family?).

Also, the "daughter" is played by a 18 yr old actress playing 15 yr old and she doesn't look 15 at all. That said, she played her part just fine.

The "love interest" on the other hand is a tough new age woman that tries REALLY hard to look and act tough. It just became ridiculously funny the more she acted that way, while looking like a supermodel. Perfectly captured a strong feminist I guess? I dunno, it was just funny cause she had trouble even defeating one guy properly and they had to bring Jack to her level to make her look tough. It's pathetic.

The point is, the story goes nowhere in the end with her. All that happens is she gets implicated, runs away, then goes back to doing what she was doing before.

Few action scenes are OK, nothing amazing. I did like the last chase scene for some reason. It was pretty realistic the way goons were looking for a character.

5/10

The Night Watchmen (2017)

Entertaining enough..

[6/10 · 2 December 2017]

Is this a bad movie? Nope.

It has good acting, nicely done monsters (makeup) with a lot of gore and action, mixed with comedy of course.

The thing is, it could've failed if the characters weren't able to work together, but they do. They compliment each other quite well and have their own quirks which keep them fun till the end. Also, I liked how the characters, most of the time, were just interested in staying alive and running away than run into battle. Of course the movie later on makes them run into the danger else it wouldn't be fun if they just hid and waited for help.

The problem is, the "big bad" just doesn't really do much other than start a zombie vampire plague, then just disappears only to reappear half-way through, get attacked and just vanish all over again. So the big bad villain is still out there, was that done for the sequel? Not sure that was a good idea because I didn't really feel satisfied with the ending. They seem to be more interested in setting up a sequel.

Overall, this movie is a fun popcorn flick that you can enjoy. Could've been more though, a bit disappointing.

Acts of Vengeance (2017)

Finally, a good action movie..

[7/10 · 30 November 2017]

After sitting through crap like "White House Down", finally a good acted simple revenge flick with good action.

A man inspired by Marcus Aurelius (Roman Emperor) goes hunting for the killers of his wife and daughter. It's a simple clichéd plot but the execution is what keep it interesting till the end.

No bullshit about "AMERICAH" no "SAVE The American PRESIDENT TO SAVE The FREE WORLD". Nah, it's a simple revenge flick with really well done action scenes. Also, I did not see Karl Urban's same on the list, thought it was Antonio only, but I'm a fan of both of these guys so I definitely had a unexpected enjoyment level maxed out.

Brimstone (2016)

Wow, just wow..

[9/10 · 28 November 2017]

This movie lasted for 2 hours, 20 mins (excluding the credits here). I actually took a break after Chapter-2 and was shocked how long the movie was. Do note, I did not check the time cause I was bored. This movie is worth sitting through.

The amazing acting, the violence, the religious bullshit on full display.. all of it immerses you as a viewer, into the life of a tortured woman whose whole life was filled with pain and suffering. I don't really wanna spoil any of it because this movie has a simple plot, but it's the execution that really shines (from director and actors).

Though I must say, I DO love the fact that this made the American religious nutcases so uncomfortable, that they rated this movie down to oblivion. I guess when someone puts a mirror to your faith and shows you how backward and horrifying it can be, just like other Abrahamic faiths (Islam), you start kicking and screaming like kids.

The same Americans who are happy with banning sex in games and movies, while being OK with violence and guns, did not like this movie at all. I wonder why? Here's the best part. People like the reverend in this movie, still exist (priests, mullahs, popes, whatever you wanna call them). Their victims still live the lives of female characters in this movie. Religion is a gift that keeps on giving.

Watch this movie, it's worth it.

The Den (2013)

Meh, nothing new..

[3/10 · 27 November 2017]

It's like a fourth horror movie that involves web chat or social chat/gathering online, ending up in murders. Nothing new.

That said, in the beginning, I had some hope and the movie wasn't exactly awfully produced with awful acting working in its favor. BUT, it goes downhill the moment director starts introducing the wonders of hacking taking over everything in protagonist's life. Even the cops can't track these amazing hackers (yes, the same agencies like NSA, tapped into our computers can't track down hackers killing people).

Apart from Hollywood hacking, you lose all interest in the killers who are shown in full view wearing generic masks trying to look scary while killing in some of THE most mundane manner. I've seen more horrifying deaths on Liveleak.

Overall, movie didn't do anything new and failed to bring something new to the genre of "social chat turning into murder", which is already stale after like 3-4 movies.

I am giving it 3 cause the protagonist isn't a bad actress and did her job most of the time, convincingly.

Also, I was going to watch Allied, no idea why I decided to watch a boring "horror" movie instead. I regret everything.

The Emoji Movie (2017)

More leftist feminist garbage..

[1/10 · 8 November 2017]

I personally think that if a movie from leftists or right-wingers comes up with their dumb propaganda, they deserve a review from us Centrists more than the others. I reviewed Supergirl before, might wanna check out that review to know what to expect in this movie as well.

This movie is awful. Ugly looking Emoji characters (and yes, they are ugly looking in apps too) bought to life with barren, featureless personality. In-fact, the only slightly funny character is the "High Five", a side-kick for the generic Hollywood protagonist and the generic "SUPER TOUGH KICKS ASS" female character.

Ignoring the ugly CGI characters, if you just focus on the characters, they are just.. bland. I don't even know how to describe the damn thing because it's just so boring and stupid that there is so much to criticize and I can't be arsed with doing it again.

Let's just finish the review with a list of feminist/liberal/leftists propaganda included in the movie, shall we?

1.) Hero is a metro sexual male who wants to express his feelings.

2.) Female is a tough as nails chick who only likes cool things. Oh and she is a supercool hacker fighting the patriarchy.

3.) Both male characters (Hero and side-kick, High Five) scream and yell like little girls when the female character does things like water slide or fall. Female character is always laughing and brave in these scenes of course.

4.) Female character likes the male for being so expressive, unlike the "other" guys.

5.) Female character thinks women are portrayed as only princesses and wants to be more. Wants to be someone else. Meanwhile, hero wants the same but she tells him to "be who he is" and not change a thing.

6.) Sh*t dance sequence when the movie ends.

This is like they took advice from whoever directs Supergirl on how to make the most "liberal" piece of garbage they could. And again, like Supergirl, I would've ignored their propaganda if rest of the content was actually good.

And why the hell is there Patrick Stewart in this movie?

Solomon Kane (2009)

Why have I not heard of this movie before?

[9/10 · 29 October 2017]

It's almost like, Hollywood intentionally buries certain films through lackluster advertising.

Maybe I missed the advertising. But it still doesn't explain how majority of people never mention this movie when discussing movies like LOTR or movies set in medieval times.

This movie is not only well acted, but the action, set design and the plot is really well done. The only problem I had was with the CGI. Then again, for a 2009 flick with a budget of just $40 million, CGI is passable.

An entertaining movie, ignored by so called "critics" and pretty much forgotten by audience. A real shame.

The Osiris Child (2016)

Wow, this was actually good..

[8/10 · 24 October 2017]

I have no idea what the other people are complaining about. I was going to watch this expecting this to be another third rate sci-movie with teenagers acting tough, but this turned out to be a well acted movie with an OK plot instead.

Also, some monster effects were a bit cheap but I had no issue with majority of CGI in the movie. Not sure why anyone would think it "ALL LOOKS SO FAKE"? Get an eye checkup?

Sure the clichéd plot isn't anything Oscar-worthy, but then, so isn't the plot for new Star Wars movies being pumped out and over-hyped by paid reviewers and fanboys.

Watch this, ignore the negative reviews. Considering I watched it for lulz thinking, it was a another cheap terrible sci-fi movie, I enjoyed it.

I would've rated 6/10 but rating it 8/10 cause this movie is being downvoted by sci-fi snobs.

The Woman in Black 2: Angel of Death (2014)

Just like the first movie..

[5/10 · 21 July 2017]

I'll be honest, I really don't understand the people who liked the first movie and hate this one for being just like the first movie.

The only noticeable difference between both of them is that, in the first movie, there was a sense of isolation because of one person in the house, over a bunch of children and their two teachers.

The awful jump "scares" are still here and the non-scary character of "Woman in Black (WiB)" returns. In-fact, they repeat the same mistakes from the first movie and try to explain way too much and show too much of the WiB character. Keeping WiB's character in shadows and not showing her terrible CGI/makeup caked face would've provided more terror than using her face for jump "scare" here and there.

My complaint with both movies is the same. Despite having good acting (both of them) and good atmosphere, they fail to create proper horror the moment WiB shows up and her shtick of moving items and opening/closing doors begins all over again. They NEED to keep her in the dark and only show her dress, which some scenes actually DO.

Unlike the first movie (6/10), I am giving this one 5/10 despite enjoying the acting of the lead actress and even the children, more than the last one (Radcliffe, nope.. did not like him much in that movie). One point taken off for shooting some key scenes in horrible lighting. The scenes in cellar are the ones I am talking about. The characters keep looking at items for so long and all you're doing is trying to squint and make out what in the hell they are actually looking at. All cellar scenes are intentionally shot under one candle-light or a lamp, and it's a bad idea.

In one of the horror scenes with all characters in cellar, they keep trying to light a candle but WiB keeps blowing it out (or wind being passed by her?). But then, when the scene ends, the male character turns on his flashlight. ARE YOU KIDDING ME? He didn't turn on the flashlight when everyone was scared of darkness but did it instantly at the end? Really? They didn't think people would question that? He didn't even try to turn on the flashlight before, AT ALL.

That said, this movie is NOT bad. It just does what the first one did. Ignore the people giving it 1/10 and whining about it being worse than the first one. They obviously had a hard-on for Radcliffe and gave that movie flying colors, despite him being average in that movie and rest of the movie being same as this one. Read the reviews of the first movie, many are first time horror viewers who are praising Radcliffe and obviously saw the horror movie cause they were Harry Potter fans. They then saw this movie thinking there would be some connection to Radcliffe but since he isn't here, they ended up focusing on the movie's flaws which were present in the first movie.

While we're at it, REALLY? Are you seriously setting up the ending for another sequel? We all know that they want to milk the WiB cow till they won't make any profit from her at all. Both movies had $15 million budget and first one made them $125 million while this one made them about $49 million dollars. This is a nice profit even if the movie is just average. The third movie will make them even less profit it seems.

Maybe end the movie as a trilogy then, cause we know they're gonna make a sequel. Just let it be the last one.

Jupiter Ascending (2015)

Glorious CGI mess..

[1/10 · 19 July 2017]

I honestly didn't even know that this was directed by the Wachowski brothers (or "sisters" lol, whatever) until the credits rolled up. This was a mess worse than Matrix Reloaded and I'm pretty sure at this point Wachowski's have forgotten how to make a movie without throwing in CGI at every corner.

CGI was EVERYWHERE and so overdone that you just stop caring about anything happening because it all looks fake. The combat is done mostly with CGI characters with SFX thrown everywhere on-screen, so get ready to spend time trying to figure out WTF is actually going on. I like how they had to mask CGI characters by throwing in blurry camera-work and motion blur in every scene. Most scenes in-fact, look like a video game capture with mindless shooting and explosions.

Most of the alien world is CGI, which would be OK except in this movie, the worlds are some of THE most generic alien worlds ever. I've seen artists create better concept art for alien worlds on DeviantArt than this movie. Every alien world is mixed with same post-processing paint-job making them look almost similar (yellow, after Matrix's green and blue, Wachowski's favorite color for sci-fi is yellow now).

Forget CGI, the plot and characters are a bigger mess. Mila Kunis is probably THE worst choice for her role.. actually no, Tatum was THE worst choice for HIS role (tbh I was more busy laughing at his pink lipstick). No idea why Sean Bean is even there, he's way too better for this crap-fest. To make it worse, most of the dialogue is blended in with loud music. Apparently Wachowski brothers still don't know how to balance sound in their movies. Alien words and worlds thrown in, while everything else is so.. human. Nothing alien about these people.

The laughably bad CGI aliens or costumes for aliens were worse than newer Star Wars movie where everything looks fake.

What a mess, I can't even be arsed to go into detail with the review, it was THAT bad.

The Last Witch Hunter (2015)

Pacing & editing is all over the place..

[4/10 · 19 July 2017]

From terrible editing to pacing of the script and scenes, this movie just feels so weird.

I liked the CGI. The visuals obviously had a lot of effort put into them and Vin Diesel works fine in his role without overdoing it, but the movie never really delivers on what you're expecting from it (you know, a lot of witch-hunting).

The whole world is populated with witches but our hero apparently takes humane approach and only kills those that "break the law" or some rule which you as a viewer don't give a sh*t about.

While we're at it, using Vin Diesel as a action hero is fine, but making him deliver lines next to actors who actually act is painful to see (that butler from Batman especially). Also, Elijah Wood's character is just underdeveloped and the movie forgets about it until the "twist" (which won't be a shock to anyone). Personally I think they should've casted someone with more sinister face in his place.

Then there are random cuts, which happen because they either re-shot those scenes without caring much for continuity or cause the editor was just high on cocaine. Either way, they are jarring. What is even more jarring is the speed with which the whole plot flows jumping from scene to scene without developing anything lore-wise or character-wise.

Movie is so-so. Watchable if you have nothing else to see since CGI and action scenes are well done (though action isn't really that amazing).