atk92 Reviews

Gigli (2003)

Average, not awful.

[5/10 · 28 September 2015]

With how strong the vitriol for this film is, I am going to come across as an apologist for it. I did not like this movie. Giving it 5/10 does not mean I liked it, it means the good and the bad canceled each other out.

There are many reasons to like this movie. There is some witty dialog, despite what the overwhelming majority say, and Ben Affleck minus some of his horrid flirting scenes is completely serviceable in this film. I think it was lost on some people that this is a comedy, and much of the comedy in this movie is derived from watching Ben Affleck's character be put in awkward and strange situations. The most obvious example of this is the morgue scene where he needs to get a finger, and only has a cheap plastic knife at his disposal, while also having to babysit a mentally ill hostage. Christopher Walken has a great wacky Walken scene in this movie that if you took in any way other than comedy, you did it wrong. I almost recommend the movie for the scene with Al Pacino alone. He may be playing a caricature of previous roles he has done, but he does it oh so well.

Now, the bad. Yes, quite a bit of the dialog is drawn out and sub par, especially between Affleck and Lopez. There are several lines in the movie that I would say are worthy of being enshrined in the terrible dialog hall of shame. I would say that the mental illness humor probably wasn't as big of a hit as the script hopes for, because there is a lot of it. I would say that if the viewer cannot stand Ben Affleck, or does not like situational humor that Gigli finds himself in, this movie can turn into an unfunny comedy. And trust me, I understand that not much is worse than an unfunny comedy.

Thankfully the humor in this movie worked enough for me that I got through the movie without hating it, and if it was 10 or 15 minutes shorter, I probably would have given it a 6. I wouldn't recommend the movie as a whole, but I would definitely recommend the Al Pacino scene by itself. If this is the worst movie you have ever seen, you haven't seen enough movies.

Far Cry 2 (2008 Video Game)

Great ideas buried by several large design problems.

[6/10 · 6 May 2015]

Far Cry 2 has some gameplay mechanics that I think are better than Far Cry 3 or Far Cry 4. Foliage physics are better than either of those games, as plants and trees can be pushed aside, set on fire, and have shredding animation when shot. Having to unlock weapons via in game currency is a much better way of rewarding players for exploration than the FC3 and FC4 method of unlocking radio towers resulting in free weapons. The actual game world is very large and incredibly well designed.

So, now that I got all of the positives out of the way, I want to go through the list of problems that this game has:

1. Fast Traveling - As I said in the positives, the map in this game is huge. Open world sandbox games need a large map, but also require a decent fast travel system. Far Cry 2 may have the worst fast travel system I have ever used. You are not allowed to fast travel between safe houses or major towns. Instead, you can only fast travel between bus stations. The main problem is that these bus stations generally are not near main mission locations, and are few and far between. A nine square kilometer grid (the game has two of them) has only 5 or 6 bus stations.

2. Game Saving - There is no auto save in this game. That is not inherently a problem, as there are many locations, including safe houses, ammo stores, and mission completions where a player can save. However, due to large amounts of traveling around the map, there are many opportunities to die repeatedly on the way to one objective. Enemies constantly respawn, and later in the game can kill you extremely fast. This makes getting across the map a chore, which just pisses you off more that there isn't a good fast travel system.

3. Diamond Briefcases - There are too many of these. These can't really be considered collectibles, as diamonds are needed to buy weapons and weapon upgrades. The sheer size of the map makes finding all of these daunting, but to find 221 of them? Absolutely ridiculous. Only collecting the flags in the original Assassins Creed game is worse than this.

4. Malaria - To be clear, I actually initially thought this was an interesting idea. Having to constantly keep medicated to keep symptoms at bay sounds like a decent added mechanic. Unfortunately it is an incredibly shallow tacked-on aspect of the game for plot purposes. Symptoms show up rapidly and do not go away until you press a button and pop a pill. In the middle of combat this is annoying, but acceptable. What is unacceptable is that you have unlimited pills as long as you do not do main storyline missions. I started the game looking for diamonds and doing contract killer missions, so my first bottle of malaria pills lasted over 15 hours of gameplay. I then hit all of the story missions in quick succession, and went through 2 bottles in 3 hours. This indicates that the pills themselves are merely a plot contrivance to make you do underground resistance missions.

5. The Campaign Story - This story is hilariously shallow. Blatant references to Heart of Darkness indicate what the plot was going for, but it just sucks. The Jackal is not that interesting as a villain, or an antihero. The revolution missions are all the same. Blow stuff up and kill people, then do the same for a different faction. That is seriously 70 percent of the campaign. It directly rips off A Fistful of Dollars. Manipulate two opposing factions for money. In dull and repetitive missions.

I think that this game has a couple of gameplay mechanics superior to the sequels, but Far Cry 3 and Far Cry 4 have much better overall playability and story than Far Cry 2.

Halo 3: ODST (2009 Video Game)

My favorite Halo game. Call it a guilty pleasure if you want.

[8/10 · 27 October 2014]

I have always viewed ODST as the unwanted child of the Halo series. This game had the unfortunate timing of being the first game after the initial trilogy had ended, and fans were wanting Halo: Reach, and this game may have been justifiably viewed as filler between Halo 3 and Halo: Reach. The game has a fairly short campaign with effectively one very large main level and several medium sized side levels. The firefight mode was a nice addition that would be continued in later Halo games. Including a multiplayer disc that unlocked all Halo 3 maps I thought was very questionable, as I would rather they have unlocked content for everybody rather than try to make Halo 3 multiplayer maps a selling point for ODST.

So despite all of these problems, why do I like it the most? Especially more than Halo CE or Halo 2? I like the game most for reasons why others hate it the most: because it is so different from other Halo games. I like playing as a character that is obviously more human than Master Chief. I can't lob grenades multiple football field lengths. Stealth weapons are introduced so that you can attempt to bypass large groups of enemies rather than taking them head on, especially on Legendary. The large map of the city is a great step for freeroaming, although unfortunately backtracking and certain gates blocking you in an attempt to linearize your actions can diminish this effect. I thought that the squad mission levels not on the main city map were done very well.

The best part for me is the simple story. Your character is simply trying to survive an occupied city and figure out what happened to his squad. This story is infinitely more engaging and relateable than any other Halo game. The stakes are fairly low by Halo standards, which I think was refreshing in comparison to always having to save the galaxy. The characters are serviceable, and I will always endorse a project that reunites members from Firefly. The part with the engineers I didn't particularly care for, as it very obviously does not fit into Halo lore (and was subsequently dropped from Halo games after) but it didn't ruin the game for me.

The last part of the game, what I loved the most about it, the soundtrack. This soundtrack IS my favorite soundtrack from any video game, let alone the Halo series. The use of jazz, of piano, combined with traditional sweeping Halo suites, it is truly a masterpiece of music, and is my go to example in pointing out musical scores done right in videogaming. I call the soundtrack flawless.

As I have indicated, there are issues with the game. I wish ODST had a better incorporation of stealth, as it seems that after getting the first grunt for free, the rest of the enemies know not only is there a problem, but almost exactly where you are, ruining silenced weapons. After the first kill, there is no point. The VISOR system is good as long as it is dark. Turn it on in mild lighting and prepare to be blinded. Also, the whole stamina and health system is rendered moot by the sheer number of health packs. There are hundreds of these things scattered throughout the city, making taking damage and avoiding combat not that high of a priority. Again, I can understand why this is most peoples least favorite Halo game. It has problems, but it also didn't follow the exact same formula in terms of story or combat. I liked that it took risks, and for better or worse tried to stand out from the other titles. If nothing else, it gave me my favorite soundtrack from a video game or movie.

Starship Troopers 2: Hero of the Federation (2004 Video)

The definition of a terrible sequel.

[2/10 · 29 August 2014]

Starship Troopers is by no means a perfect movie. I personally enjoyed it, but it really wouldn't even come close to being Paul Verhoven's best film. Probably what it does best is the social satire. Those commercials throughout the film are absolutely hilarious to someone with a darker sense of humor (such as myself). It is a decent send-up to sci-fi action movies, embracing tropes of the genre more than inventing them, and succeeds pretty well at doing so.

Cue this piece of trash. It is inherently obvious from the beginning that this film has a significantly lower budget. There are no big stars, the special effects border on laughable, and the writing is intellectually obscene. The first movie wasn't exactly a smart film, but this movie makes the writing in that one seem profound. Poorly written stereotypes flood the screen and stupidity ensues. Basically this movie is the plot to John Carpenter's The Thing (an absolutely fantastic and intelligently done sci-fi film, highly recommended) stuffed into a Starship Troopers movie. That could work if Paul Verhoven returned, or maybe if you got a director like David Cronenberg to somehow agree to it, but in this instance it is simply awful. Nothing about this movie seems sincere. I have very rarely come across a movie that was completely devoid of passion, or any other emotion for that matter. It just looked like no one was having fun (because they probably weren't) in a cheap made for TV movie that was shot quickly and economically to reduce costs. It's really quite a shame, as the first movie set up for sequels pretty well, but trust me and just stop after watching the first one.

Magnolia (1999)

In one word: ambitious.

[9/10 · 28 August 2014]

Magnolia is probably one of those movies that you never expect to see, and know that you will never see again. Apparently PTA got a free pass from the studio after Boogie Nights to pretty much make whatever he wanted, and man did he shoot for the fences.

The camera-work and cinematography in this film is top notch. Film connoisseurs will particularly enjoy some of his extremely long tracking shots, such as the shot leading up to the quiz show. What makes these scenes effective is, despite how long they are, there is a lot of dialog and character interactions happening. Which brings me to my next point.

The characters and acting in this movie are amazing. Every. Single. Actor. in this movie brought their A game, which leads to amazing moments of tension, tenderness, and even disgust. Tom Cruise, William H. Macy, Julianne Moore, and Phillip Baker Hall are the highlights in the movie. Any of those four were deserving of acting awards for their roles in this movie. That does not take away from very solid performances by John C. Reilly and the late Phillip Seymour Hoffman. But it isn't just the fact that these are great actors and actresses; the characters they portray are incredibly diverse. Over the course of the film, the viewer is constantly finding out new pieces of information that shed light on a character's motivations and actions. This is one of the few movies where in most cases my opinions and feelings about certain characters changed drastically from scene to scene.

The soundtrack for this movie is also worth mentioning. Some of the more emotional scenes in this movie are supplemented very effectively with an excellent score. The example that comes to my mind the quickest is the climax of the quiz show What Do Kids Know?. The score "Jimmy's Breakdown" silently building in the background as Phillip Baker Hall tries to fight off physical exhaustion to host the show is possibly one of the most emotionally powerful moments I have ever seen in a film.

The actual story itself is so unique and interweaves between characters so well that I won't say anything other than I guarantee it is entirely original. You will not have heard this story before or seen it successfully duplicated since.

Now, are there problems with the movie? I think there are a couple. One is minor, the other is somewhat large. The minor problem I had was with the characters all singing the pop song near the middle of the film. I personally think its kinda cheesy and out of place, but I can easily overlook it. The big problem is with the frogs. I don't personally think it was a great climax to the movie, and I think that it doesn't gel with the otherwise solid and well-written storytelling up to that point. Some of my friends have no problem with it, so I may be in the minority with that gripe.

Despite a few problems Magnolia is an overwhelmingly good film. A fair warning to the casual movie goer: I believe this movie's primary purpose is not to entertain, it is to make you think. This is not some generic movie to put on in the background and occasionally glance at every five or ten minutes. This a film you allot three hours of your day so that you can give it your undivided attention.

Days of Heaven (1978)

I guess Terrence Malick just isn't for me.

[2/10 · 3 May 2014]

My first exposure that I had to Terrence Malick was Badlands. While apparently every critic (and the overwhelming majority of IMDb reviewers) would say that this was a good choice to introduce me to one of the greatest filmmakers, I found the dialog awkward and strange. The actual film, while very effective of capturing the beauty of nature (a staple of Malick movies as I later found out) was not all that great. Still, it had a plot and characters with discernible motives, so I was able to somewhat reason away what I personally thought was a bizarre and pretentious style of making films. Probably the biggest reason I can give a pass to Badlands is that it gave Martin Sheen, one of my favorite actors, a boost into big Hollywood films. I was then told by a friend that I should give Malick another chance, and either Days of Heaven or Thin Red Line would be a good idea for my second film. Needless to say, after sitting through this, I probably will not be getting around to another Malick movie any time soon.

I should point out that there are several aspects of this movie that are excellent. As with Badlands, the cinematography, musical score, and setting are absolutely beautiful. If all of the dialog and scenes with actual people in the frame were removed, I might actually love this movie. What I'm trying to say is if Terrence Malick made a documentary for National Geographic, I would definitely watch it.

The dialog, much like Badlands, is absolutely awful. I don't find entire conversations conveyed through facial expressions, staring, and minimalistic bombastic sentences to be good storytelling. The narration is no better, and managed to annoy me more than anything else. This leads to a fundamental problem of the movie, the dialog and narration is so bad, that I am not able to really understand or relate to the characters. Why do they do what they do? What are there personalities? I don't know. This causes me to not care about them, or what happens to them.

Another problem is when a scene develops, occasionally the camera cuts to nature, or just moves on to another scene with the characters all together. This got so bad that my brother literally called a cutaway before it happened. As a scene was developing that implied sex was about to happen, my brother said, "Huh. I bet its gonna cut to rain or something right before anything physical actually happens." Guess what? Right when something physical was about to happen, it cut to rain falling on leaves. The cuts in this movie are predictably bad.

This movie being pretentious is just my opinion. I am of the belief that characters and character interactions are more important than setting or scenery, and it is obvious that Malick does not share this philosophy, and this means that I probably will never like a movie that he makes. Most will call this good film, and I simply cannot agree with that. This movie is barely 90 minutes but I would rather watch Gettysburg than watch this again. I wanted to like this movie, and that may be why my reaction is so strong. I do not want to try to take away the joy that some moviegoers get from watching this movie, and in the end can only hope that we can agree to disagree about Malick films.

Network (1976)

"You can't make up anything anymore. The world itself is a satire. All you're doing is recording it."

[10/10 · 24 January 2014]

That quote from Art Buchwald, a political satirist from the Washington Post, could not have been a better summary for Network. Sidney Lumet has directed other fantastic films (Dog Day Afternoon and Twelve Angry Men) but I would go so far as to call Network his indisputable masterpiece. This movie is a dark comedy, and very heavy satire. If you hate network television like myself, you will absolutely love this movie. It mocks and calls out everything wrong with Network TV, and does not try to disguise the contempt for modern television. The movie is extremely effective at doing this because of the fantastic cast, and with wonderful performances from the likes of Holden, Duvall, Dunaway and Finch, Network is one of the best acted movies I have ever watched. The cinematography is also wonderful, and the direction is obviously top notch from one of the best directors in cinema.

The only problem with the movie's satire is that I wasn't laughing at all. That was the thought that kept running through my head the entire time I was watching this movie. The reason why I wasn't laughing was very simple: everything they mockingly suggest network television to stoop to has happened. A good analogy would be if Russia and the United States has actually launched nukes, and I watched Dr. Strangelove. It's still funny, but I probably couldn't bring myself to laugh at it. The only thing that hasn't happened yet from this movie is a network killing a man on air for poor ratings. Yet...

BioShock 2 (2010 Video Game)

And did we tell you the name of the game, boy? We call it riding the gravy train.

[4/10 · 23 January 2014]

In my opinion Bioshock is one of the best games of all time. The characters, the setting, the combat and the story were absolutely top notch. As long as you don't care about the story or the characters, Bioshock 2 may also be a good game for you as well. This game solely strives to recreate the setting and the combat style from the first game. That is it. What? You liked the strong characters from the first game, that were well-rounded and had great, insightful observations about Rapture? Shove that. Andrew Ryan has been replaced by the monotonous Sophie Lamb, one of the least interesting and least intimidating villains I have ever encountered. She is one note the entire game. Seriously, her tone literally does not change whenever she talks, and she just says the same dribble throughout the entire game. Atlas is replaced by Sinclair, who I will say is the only character with a reasonable amount of thoughtful writing.

The story is absolute rubbish and doesn't try to be innovative or intelligent. I am glad to see that they were so original that they literally ripped the half***ed morality system straight out of the first game. Yes, they kept the worst part of the first game. You get to be a Big Daddy, which is cool for about the first ten minutes of the game, then you just realize that you could have played the last two hours of the original game and gotten the same experience. The combat is almost identical to the first game, with a few minor tweaks so that I can't shout blatant plagiarism. The one thing this game gets down pretty well is that you feel like you are in a Rapture that is 10 years older than the first game. I liked the advanced decay of the city, and thought that some of the new design choices were pretty imaginative.

Unfortunately this is just a gimmick. Much like the combat and being a Big Daddy, the setting of Rapture was the platform that this game was sold on. There was nothing from a narrative standpoint to sell this story on, and it actually manages to devalue the first games story if you consider it in cannon. (Which I don't. Yes, this story is so bad I refuse to acknowledge it's existence.) It is a shameless installment that wasn't necessary in any way, shape or form, and has no right to exist. My rating may be a little harsh in the eyes of some, but this game is the epitome of a terrible sequel.

Troll 2 (1990)

One of the funniest movies I have ever seen.

[2/10 · 14 November 2013]

Anybody who has seen this movie and hasn't liked it was watching it with the wrong mindset. Troll 2 is not an intentional comedy, or a good scary movie. This movie is accidentally one of the funniest films ever released. The amount of ineptitude in craft and baffling story decisions are truly something that can never be repeated. Despite these traits that most people would associate with a completely despicable movie, there is an earnest sincerity by all of the crew that make this film so charming. You can tell that the director, and even some of the actors genuinely thought they were making a good movie. Certain scenes from this movie (OH MY GOOOOODDDDD!!!!!) are stuff of legend, but trust me there are many more that you have never heard of. If you like watching movies that are so bad that they are great, you have to give this movie a shot. Also give the documentary Best Worst Movie, made about Troll 2, a look as well. Don't try to take it seriously, and don't go into it looking to hate on terribly made cinema. Just enjoy the terrible lines, awful acting, and insane plot devices.

Resident Evil 5 (2009 Video Game)

Bigger is not better.

[4/10 · 10 October 2013]

TL;DR this game has very little well-executed ideas and is a drastic disappointment in comparison with RE4. Play RE4 instead of this game.

Resident Evil 5 commits one of the worst sins of a 'survival-horror' video game. Note the quotations please because this game is about as much of a survival horror game as Limbo is a first person shooter. The sin is introducing a partner system. Video games are the most scary when they are solo. The loneliness, and the feeling like everything around you is working against you is incredibly effective. Games like Silent Hill 2, Amnesia: Dark Descent, and Slender would not be anywhere near as scary if they were cooperative campaigns. While it is bad enough that there is a partner system, its is so much worse because the AI if you are playing by yourself is absolutely inept. Sheva loves to heal you if you are hurt, which is great, except she likes using First Aid Spray to heal you if you get to any health level that isn't green. You will find your kits and herbs gone incredibly fast, unless you hold onto them yourself. Sheva likes to shoot things, which is also good, except for some odd reason she really likes to use only her pistol, even if she has an automatic. This may have been fixed with a patch, but I wouldn't know. Lastly, Sheva also needs constant attention to remain alive. On professional difficulty you will pull your hair out trying to keep her alive.

The new inventory system is also one of the worst inventory systems I have ever used. RE4 has a great inventory system with the attaché case than has space slots. Guns are bigger than eggs, which are smaller than ammo. Well, apparently that inventory system sucked, cause they reverted back to the RE1 inventory where you get to hold X amount of items that all take up a slot, no matter what size. Yes, an RPG takes up the same amount of space as a rotten egg. It also is incredibly annoying trying to trade stuff with your partner. I also was a little offset by the ludicrous amount of different guns available in the game. RE4 had three shotguns, one automatic, two magnums, two sniper rifles, and four handguns. RE5 has at least twenty-five different weapons you can find throughout the game. It doesn't really add to the game, and tries to add unnecessary complexity to a system that was so nice because of how simple it was. The only difference that may actually be considered an improvement for a 'survival horror' game is that you manage your inventory in real time in the game. Stuff does not get paused for you to organize your items or to quickly pull a shotgun if an enemy gets too close. That is an actual improvement.

Dialogue is painfully clichéd and awkward. Conversations in this game between characters are so shallow and meaningless they can really just be skipped. It doesn't help that Redfield and Sheva are very stupid individuals, but then again if I was as ripped as Chris I wouldn't have much time to do anything except juice up and go to the gym. I recently played the Gamecube version of RE1, and Chris Redfield has a very reasonable build. He looks in shape, but he looks like a guy who does other things besides lift in a gym. It just makes me wonder what happened between the events of these two games to make him want to get that ripped.

The actual story is abysmal. I realize and acknowledge that narrative has never been a strong suit of the Resident Evil series, but this game makes absolutely no attempt to try and break this tendency. This game follows a tried and true formula of the protagonists investigating an incident that seems small enough and innocent, but then blows up into a large adventure. Pretty much every game in the series follows this formula. However, this game escalates so quickly and scenery changes so rapidly that you don't get to focus on the creepy environments. This game has rail shooting sequences where you are on a turret. The bosses have to be so ridiculous that you need to use .50 cal turrets or dump them in lava and then blow them up with rockets. The fights and the scenery are just some of the indicators of how ludicrous the scale and stakes are becoming in these games. This need to continually raise stakes and scale will not, and cannot be able to continue. RE1 was in a mansion, RE2 and RE3 were in a city, RE4 was in a small part of Spain, RE5 was in Africa, RE6 was global, where will RE7 be?

Pink Floyd: Live at Pompeii (1972)

Simply Astonishing

[9/10 · 10 September 2013]

It really should be no surprise that Pink Floyd of all bands could put together such a fantastic live performance. PULSE is one of the best live sets I have ever seen, but for the longest time Live at Pompeii eluded my attention. The first twelve minutes and the last twelve minutes of the movie are devoted to the best version of "Echoes" that I have ever heard. Other songs included in the set are "One of These Days", "A Saucerful of Secrets", and "Set the Controls for the Heart of the Sun". Depending on which version you watch, you will also get a glimpse of the band working in the studio on tracks for Dark Side of the Moon.

The cinematography of the movie has already been complimented upon by numerous reviewers, but it is definitely worth complimenting again, because it is so good. The actual interviews with band members vary in quality. Most interviews with Roger Waters involve him just messing with the interviewer. Mason and Gilmour are alright, but the best interview of the film is probably with the most under-appreciated member of the band, keyboardist Richard Wright. I watched this movie under the impression that is was only live set, and instead became an interesting mixture of live performances of music video quality intertwined with interviews and just filming the band hanging out in the studio. It almost seems like a documentary, and it works refreshingly well.

If I had to give the highlights of the performances, I would say that "Echoes" is a very obvious choice and is by far the highlight of the set. A not so obvious second in my opinion is "Careful With That Axe Eugene". This song manages to be so menacing yet subtle that I just can't help but like it. In both cases I find these performances superior to the studio recordings. The main detractor of this film is that "Echoes" is broken up into two parts. With a song so psychedelic and epic, it is such a shame it was cut in half. If the movie ended with the song in its entirety, it would have been almost perfect.

The Lone Ranger (2013)

Sensory Overload

[4/10 · 8 September 2013]

I took my little brother and his friend to see this movie because it was a midnight premiere and no one else was willing to stay up until 3am to watch a movie with them. They both liked it, so obviously this movie isn't for me, and I get that. However, that doesn't mean that I don't like a good shut-off your brain and watch experience. This movie just rubbed me the wrong way in almost every possible manner. From a storytelling standpoint I absolutely hated the constant interruptions by the kid. It ruined pacing and brought each scene to a dead stop. The plot was predictable to the point of being painful. I literally predicted who the villain was the first time I saw him on screen. These are just two minor complaints. The two major complaints I have are tonal issues, and Gore Verbinski's predictable sensory overload finale.

The tone of this movie is all over the map from scene to scene. It is so obvious for most of the film that this is meant to be a comedy, but then they randomly throw in incredibly dark moments of cannibalism and genocide. One scene, I kid you not, has one of the antagonists massacring Indians, and effectively his garrison wipes out an entire tribe. The very next scene is a slapstick moment of comedy with a blindfolded Lone Ranger hilariously escaping a death squad. That may be unnoticed by most movie-goers, but it is just something that bothered me.

Of course there must be a mention of the finale. I could include the intro train scene of the movie in this category as well, but I'll just stick with the ending sequence. Gore Verbinski has had a tendency to create a ridiculously stylized and over the top finish to all of his movies, just look at the second and third pirates movies. Apparently this is a hit with the audiences, and it hasn't ever seemed to really bother me before, but this time was different. I was subjected to a 10 minute extended version of the William Tell Overture Finale while an action scene that was fast-paced, CGI-filled, insanely-edited, and emotionless went on the the background. My brain just wanted to stop watching because it simply did not care anymore.

Little kids may have a lot of fun with this movie, but at a running time of two and a half hours it stretches to the point of unbearable. There was absolutely no charm to this movie whatsoever for me, and I would call it the worst movie I saw at the theaters over the summer.

The Wicker Man (2006)

Teeters between boring and hilariously awful.

[3/10 · 8 September 2013]

Any movie-goer who has ever watched a movie critic at any point has probably heard of this movie. Wicker Man joins the ranks of films such as The Room, Troll 2, and Battlefield Earth as a hilarious accident that is lightning in a bottle. First of all, I don't know why this remake exists. The original is a cult classic that had some genuinely great moments. I guess that made it a prime target for Hollywood, so here it is. All of the dialog in this movie, and I mean EVERY. SINGLE. LINE. is hilariously bad or just awkward, or sometimes both. The acting is just awful. Nick Cage turns the scenery chewing up to eleven, and everyone else is either not talented enough or trying too hard to act. Really the strongest parts of this movie are act one and act three. Most of the classic terrible lines (NOT THE BEES! HOW'D IT GET BURNED? What's in the bag, a shark or something?) are in those acts, and enough is happening to keep you entertained. However, the second act where the actual investigating is occurring is just boring. It is incredibly repetitive and turns into just a generic boring investigation flick. I realize that there isn't a film out there that is hilariously terrible for the entire running time, but this one tries. If you can find it for a dollar, and want to see Hollywood gone oh so wrong, give this a try. If you like bad movies, you've seen this already.

Rudy (1993)

A feel good story chugged out of the Hollywood machine.

[6/10 · 7 September 2013]

I guess it is just assumed that every Notre Dame fan likes the movie Rudy. I don't, so I guess that makes me an anomaly. Now that I've got that out of the way, this movie does a good job with playing the underdog card. The acting is good, and it does not detract in almost any of the scenes. An exception may be some of the football player actors. Slightly clunky lines and delivery there, but nothing that derails the narrative. Also, the cinematography is great; this is a very beautiful looking film. I also think the movie did a good job of capturing the feeling of the University of Notre Dame on football Saturday.

So why do I not like this movie? The based on a true story claim. Look, I get that Hollywood needs to take certain liberties with the facts to make it a better product, but this movie is an instance where it just goes too far. I don't actually know much about Rudy's personal life, I am referring more to the actual finale of the movie. There are plenty of accounts of the inaccuracies of the ending game and buildup, so I won't go into it. And while I don't like some of the liberties taken with facts, I HATE the depiction of Dan Devine in this movie. This movie didn't need to have an antagonist. It is incredibly lazy how they wrote him to be a stereotypical jerk who won't let the protagonist succeed at any cost. Devine was nice guy in real life who became a convenient scapegoat for this smaltzy movie. That is absolutely TERRIBLE writing.

Limbo (2010 Video Game)

Simple, yet effective.

[8/10 · 2 August 2013]

Take a game with no color, no dialogue, no 3D, and a musical score so subtle it might as well be ambient noise. In most cases that sounds like a terrible game, but Limbo pulls it off incredibly well. This indie release has received much deserved praise for its simplicity, yet very effective gameplay. I think this game masters one aspect incredibly well, and that is the sound of the environment. Heavy footsteps, loud electrical crackles, and scurrying spider steps all are done to perfection to a point where no background noise is necessary at all. 2-D sidescrollers have been done to death, but Limbo feels almost entirely original because of how it is presented. The plot is very simple and almost doesn't need to exist for this game to work. It is more about the tension, and players will be on edge the first time they play this game. The platforming, with some exceptions, is satisfactory. The game is a bit short, but much like Portal, this game is better because it is shorter, not overstaying its welcome. I did have a few gripes about some of the ludicrous amount of precision required for certain platforming sections, and some false paths will lead you to nowhere except certain death, but all in all it is a unique little platformer that I am glad is in my collection.

Stan Helsing (2009)

Who approved this garbage, and then financed it?!

[1/10 · 9 July 2013]

There are relatively few times that I have come out of a movie so bitter and angry as this one. I look at this movie and other movies such as Epic Movie, Disaster Movie, Not Another Teen Movie, etc. and wonder what happened to spoof comedy. There are fewer types of movies out there that are worse than unfunny comedies, and this 'comedy' got ZERO laughs out of me. Who finds this stuff funny? Oh look, its Leslie Nielson in drag, that's HILARIOUS! Oh, and all of these iconic movie slashers such as Michael Myers and Freddy Kreuger are doing the YMCA dance.(I'm completely serious.) That is not funny, its a farce. I don't know what is worse, the writing or the fact that there seems to be some sort of market for a movie like this.

What makes this movie even worse is that while some terrible movies get the thrashing they deserve, (such as The Happening, Troll 2, and Battlefield Earth) they are memorable. Those movies are entertaining, although not in the way the director intended. This movie is not memorable in how bad it is. It. Just. Sucks. I have rated over 800 movies on this website, and have only given out eight 1/10 ratings. This movie earns and deserves that distinction, because it has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.

BioShock Infinite (2013 Video Game)

Minority opinion here: It's a letdown.

[6/10 · 8 July 2013]

I love the original Bioshock. It is probably my favorite game in my collection, and after five or six years I would still consider one of the best games of the last ten years, if not THE best. This may explain why Infinite is just not so good to me. Don't get me wrong, it is by no means a bad game. It succeeds at entertaining, but I had a lot of problems with it, both in terms of story and gameplay.

I won't go into the story much. All I will say is that I found the first third of the game to be incredibly interesting and intriguing, and then as soon as you need to free a weapon smith (ANYONE who has played the game knows what I'm talking about) it just starts its descent into convoluted mess. I don't think the end of the game is good because it makes no sense. This game to me really just seemed to try to confuse the gamer with unnecessary plot complexity in order to seem more grandiose than it really was. As soon as you start a story involving dimensions beyond the fourth dimension it becomes really difficult to keep a story focused and poignant.

The gameplay was worse than the story for me. Bioshock Infinite drops all pretense of a survival game by giving you a two weapon limit, (like Halo) a respawning shield, (like Halo) and limited ammunition for your guns. (like Halo) This game doesn't feel like a Bioshock sequel/prequel, it feels like Master Chief is blasting his way through Columbia. I also really didn't like throughout the course of the game that certain events had to be triggered before you could do quests in other parts of the map that you could already explore. This created a lot of annoying backtracking and enemy respawning that seemed lazy at best and poor design at worst. Oh, and I will go on record saying the last fight of the game is complete garbage. That was thrown into the game for an extreme added difficulty, not for any narrative or artistic reasons. I died maybe two times playing through the first time on medium, until I got to that fight. It took me TWO HOURS. I can only imagine how horrible it will be on 1999 mode.

In the end this is a very small minority opinion. This game is posting a 9.7 as of the time of this review, which is one of the highest scores I have seen a game get. I will recommend it, because while I don't like it, I can see why others do. But to anyone else who may have found this game disappointing: you are not alone.

The Brood (1979)

The Shape of Rage

[7/10 · 7 May 2013]

With apologies to any fans of Shivers, Rabid, or Fast Company, I consider The Brood to be the first great Cronenberg film. This was a film born out of Cronenberg's anger towards his soon to be ex-wife at the time, and man does it show. While Kramer vs Kramer did a good job of showing all sides of a divorce and managed to make them all look sympathetic, Cronenberg instead focused on the anger, fear, and chaos that occurs in divorce. Just as this movie became the physical symbol of Cronenberg's rage, the brood in the film become an equally terrifying physical presence of rage and retribution.

What I think made this movie so good was that all of the actors, even the child actors, were very good. Oliver Reed in particular just seems to grab your attention in every scene that he is in. I believe this was the first of what would become one of the greatest director-composer collaborations in cinematic history between Cronenberg and Howard Shore, and the score for this film is excellent. It constantly borders on a Psycho-esque Hitchcock tone, but manages to be its own eerily unique composition. The effects and visuals are absolutely fantastic and shocking, as one should expect from a Cronenberg film.

One may find fault that the movie starts off very slow. However, I really liked how the movie started off slow and built up further and further until peaking at the climax, and I think the climax of this movie may be one of the tensest moments I have ever experienced in cinema. The movie ends in true Cronenberg fashion, and I think that the final shot of the film was probably scariest in concept to Cronenberg himself with what he was going through in real life at the time. This film was very personal to him, and it is obvious that he invested a lot of himself into it. I only wish more directors would do the same with their movies.

Spec Ops: The Line (2012 Video Game)

Do you feel like a hero yet?

[9/10 · 31 March 2013]

Spec Ops: The Line is a truly unexpected gem of storytelling. The story takes some elements of Apocalypse Now, and Heart of Darkness, and puts them in the setting of the desert city of Dubai. The game gives a respectful nod to these sources by naming the antagonist, Colonel Konrad, after the author of Heart of Darkness, Joseph Conrad (born Jozef Konrad). This game holds back no punches, and has extremely shocking, disturbing, and upsetting imagery. As the game progresses, the player becomes more and more removed from the protagonist. By the time you reach the finale, you almost rather dread whatever closure is going to happen, instead of eagerly anticipating it. And in a gaming market where the US is always the protagonist, and the enemy is (insert Russia/China/North Korea here), this game is a refreshing reprieve that shows that sometimes the most dangerous enemy is a bit closer to home. From a story telling standpoint, this game is easily a 9 and I would personally give it a 10.

The combat style of this game is unfortunately very mediocre. For a game with such a compelling narrative, the combat is the definition of generic. If I had to compare it to another game, I would compare it to Gears of War in fighting style. It is a cover-based third person shooter. However, there are other aspects of the campaign that I found very enjoyable. Music, particularly certain classic rock tracks, are used absolutely brilliantly in this game. The last nitpick I have with this game is the loading screens. Every time you die, it takes 30-45 seconds to reload the level. In a linear shooter, that is simply too long. It also kinda interrupts the atmosphere and pacing of intense parts of the game when you have to stare at a loading screen so often.

Overall I would recommend this game to anyone who likes a strong narrative in a video game. If you play games for enjoyment, I would recommend it as a rental. I am very glad I bought this game and played it, but it was not an enjoyable experience. Anyone who beat this game would understand exactly what I mean by that.

Note: This game has received lukewarm to positive reviews, with the main detractor being multiplayer is lacking. Anyone who claims that this game is bad because of multiplayer completely and ironically missed the point of the campaign.

Death Bed: The Bed That Eats (1977)

Pass on this little abomination of cinema. You'll thank me later.

[2/10 · 10 March 2013]

The title pins the movie perfectly. This movie has an absolutely ludicrous concept and an even more bizarre execution. This honestly felt like some college student tried to mash a Grade B horror concept with an artistically symbolic narrative. Guess what? Those two things mix about as well as peanut butter and petroleum jelly. I watched this movie expecting it to be so bad, it was funny. Nope. This movie takes itself rather seriously considering its premise, and as such is often just awkward and incredibly boring. Yes, this movie is 80 minutes, but it felt like two hours, because NOTHING happens in this movie. There really isn't anything in it for me to like. The characters are terribly acted, and aren't even worth caring about in the first place. Overall you will be suffering more trying to make it through this movie than most of the characters that become this bed's meals. I am sure there is an audience for this type of movie, but honestly this movie is so poorly made that it should drive away any competent fans of cinema.

Fallout: New Vegas (2010 Video Game)

A good game with excessively frustrating glitches.

[6/10 · 2 March 2013]

For the record, I own the Ultimate Edition for Xbox 360, and have put the game onto my hard drive to try and diminish potential issues.

This review is a latecomer to the scene, as this game has been out for several years at this point. However, I think that I need to bring to light that while this game can be very enjoyable in the way most modern Bethesda games are, the terrible bugs that can randomly occur while playing this game greatly diminish the Fallout experience.

The story of the game is simple enough, and I won't review it this post. In short, it is a competent narrative that is a good enough hook to make the gamer invested in what happens. Side quests that are a staple of Bethesda sandbox games are omnipresent in this game, although I will say that it seems that compared to Fallout 3, this game seems to focus more on combat experience than quest experience. In Fallout 3 huge XP bonuses were gained only for completing quests. The more important the quest, the more XP awarded. In this game that still happens, but now there are bonuses in XP for completing certain combat challenges, such as killing X amount of enemies, popping pills Y amount of times, or drinking and eating Z amount of health. This isn't necessarily a detractor to the game, but it is a change and a focus shift that may bother some gamers.

The combat itself is very similar to previous Fallout games. VATS is still the go-to for combat, but one major improvement in the game was the ability to use iron sights for aiming guns manually. This is a very simple change, but it makes a big difference in combat, because alternating between manual aiming at enemies and using VATS becomes a more plausible option than in Fallout 3. There are several major problems that I personally have had in combat. Several times I have used VATS, only for my character to enter VATS mode for a prolonged period of time without shooting at the specified target. This is a problem because your character is still vulnerable in this mode, and you are rendered completely helpless to whatever enemies are attacking you. Another problem I have had is with the Mysterious Stranger perk. This stranger will show up and do his work, but then VATS mode will continually focus on him while you again helplessly take damage again. I have died at least fifteen times due to these two aforementioned bugs. I have had countless enemies get stuck in rocks or in walls, and have also at one point had to restart from a save because I walked over an uneven slope, and entered continuous and inescapable free fall.

Several other problems I have encountered are random freezing, and I have had several save files corrupt, ruining over 10 hours of game play. I have also occasionally had my screen change colors, often to an unplayable point where my screen was completely bright green.

Suggestions: Save often, and create at least five different save files. This will hopefully prevent losing progress from file corruption. If frame rate slows down, immediately save. Avoid the Mysterious Stranger Perk, and do not use VATS unless completely necessary. These are suggestions that solve the problems I have encountered, there may be more I haven't encountered. Overall it is a good experience, but all of the aforementioned issues have made it frustrating and unfortunately somewhat ruined the game experience for me.

Paranormal Activity 4 (2012)

Boring.

[2/10 · 11 February 2013]

If you want my quick opinion, it is a bad movie with terrible pacing, poor story, and stupid characters. Don't watch it. Wanna know why? Keep reading.

I look at this movie as the epitome of everything bad about found footage movies. It is lazy, cheap, and easy to make. This isn't about any sort of compelling narrative, it is a factory produced product that will easily make back its production costs. Having a low budget isn't always a bad thing, and in many cases shows the talent and vision required to produce so much with so little. Too bad this movie is content with just doing nothing. At all.

Anyways I reluctantly watched this movie when one of my friends rented it, and I noticed that it is remarkably similar in structure to all of the other movies. Weird stuff happens, things escalate, everyone dies. That is a seven word sentence that describes every Paranormal Activity movie. Just to mix things up they usually throw in some new gag on how to see the paranormal stuff. In the last movie it was a camera that would rotate, in this one, it is an Xbox Kinect. Seriously? In the first movie they have one camera. This movie uses laptops. Lots of laptops. This is so impractical that I really shouldn't mention it. The first movie started off with weird stuff and escalated, and eventually ended on a very disturbing note. This movie escalates, then nothing serious happens for forty minutes, then everyone starts dying. Pacing in this movie is simply nonexistent. Another thing that angered me was the stupid amount of jump scares. The scariest jump scare, that they use in the trailer, isn't even paranormal, its her boyfriend pulling her off the bed. They have gotten so lazy that they don't even want to create a real scary moment.

Also, I kept asking one question during the movie. Why are they filming all of these conversations/events? It drives me insane the amount of filming people do of each other in this movie. People do not act like this. Also, with so many cameras recording all of the time, how would they ever see all of the footage? They put all of these cameras out to record (I believe there are three), and at least one is running at almost all times. How are they ever going to see all of the footage? They can't. There literally is not enough time in the day for them to go through all of this footage. Which begs the question: If they can't look at it, why record it? In scenes where they should have looked at the footage, and it would have been beneficial for them to do so, they didn't. I guess what I am trying to say is that this defies the logic of found footage film.

Thus concludes my review for Found Footage Loud Noise 4: The Startling.

Cruel Jaws (1995 Video)

Bruno Mattei takes aim at the Jaws franchise.

[3/10 · 2 February 2013]

Cruel Jaws is exactly what you would expect from a man who made a career out of churning out sub-par ripoffs of much better made and successful films. Cruel Jaws takes plot points from literally every other Jaws movie. From Jaws: Mayor/generic jerk who doesn't want to close beach, hosts huge regatta, and becomes public villain when shark attacks at regatta. Check. Jaws 2: Shark takes out helicopter. Woman tries to pour gasoline on shark and uses flare gun. Kills self instead. Check. Jaws 3: Water aquatic park animals. Check. Jaws The Revenge: Laughably bad looking shark which is exacerbated by extended camera shots of it. Check.

But you know whats funny? I liked it much more than the last two Jaws movies, especially that putrid vomit known as Jaws The Revenge. This movie is laughably bad, but it is entertaining with how bad it is. I would have expected this movie to be an episode for Mystery Science Theater 3000. That's what type of movie this is. It is called Cruel Jaws, what did you expect? This isn't Steven Spielberg caliber material, and doesn't deserve praise, but don't tell me you didn't laugh at least several times during this movie.

Jaws: The Revenge (1987)

Jumping the shark..

[1/10 · 22 January 2013]

I didn't even think this movie existed for the longest time. Surely after the farce that was Jaws 3D no one in their right minds would try to milk this concept any further, right? Wrong. Jaws 4 "The Revenge" is a jumbled mess of ideas that only a person on a raging coke binge would have thought as passable material. Are there any redeemable qualities to this movie? No. Michael Caine was the lone hope in this movie, and gets terrible lines and looks generally bored with whatever is going on. Lorraine Gary is in this movie because her husband owned the studio that produced it, and she comes across as a crazy widow who at this point should honestly be committed to a mental institute. The shark is shown very early and very often, and to call it laughable would be the understatement of the movie. It is amazing that I can't tell whether the terrible CGI shark in Jaws 3D or the terrible mechanical shark in "The Revenge" is worse. In the end, it doesn't matter. The story is incoherent and boring with very little tension or suspense. The characters are bland and forgettable while being played by actors who either took this movie too lightly or too seriously. The effects in this movie are something that a college student could come up with. No redeeming qualities in a movie that is a blatant cash cow. I wouldn't even call this a good movie to riff on, because it is just so boring.

The Legend of the Titanic (1999)

Insulting on every level of existence.

[1/10 · 17 January 2013]

This 'movie' is the perfect storm of bad. As a movie it is poorly made, with terrible animation and awful voice acting. As a story it is so baffling I would almost describe it as experimental. The 'movie' spits on the graves of the 1,500+ victims of one of the worst disasters of the 20th century by making the main message be about saving the whales and stop global whaling. Obviously this 'movie' is made for kids, but I am of the belief that kids deserve better than this. If you are a parent, and you care for the proper healthy mental development of your child, you show them Disney or Pixar. If you are just looking for a bad movie to make fun of, then by all means. This is a very easy target, and deserves all riffing and mocking you can throw at it. Just find a free version of it please, because on basic principle I would have trouble sleeping at night knowing that people actually made money off of this 'movie'.

Update: Wow, seems like some people have been going through and downvoting all negative reviews for this movie. Maybe the crew for this movie finally discovered IMDb..