Change Your Image
basildonboroughfc-53-110251
Reviews
Blade Runner 2049 (2017)
What a bore
What a bore.
The film felt like it went on for a lot longer than it actually was, and with a very thin plot stretched out for 2 hours and 40 minutes. It would have been quicker to read 'Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep' by Philip K Dick, which influenced the original film.
The imagery and special affects are spectacular. The sound track is clearly influenced by the original film and was quite good. The film didn't get anywhere near the atmosphere of the 1982 film.
There were times when it was hard to hear some of the dialogue but as most of that dialogue was pointless waffle that wasn't too much of an issue. There were long scenes of dull silence followed by long scenes of needless chatter, all with no action or interest.
I got so bored watching this I counted 17 people leave the screen in the last hour of the film who didn't return.
Ryan Gosling (K) was mostly poor throughout the film. A small tree in a leather jacket could have played that role just as well.
Ana de Armas (Joi) stood out amongst the cast as K's hologram love interest, backed by spectacular computer imagery.
Jered Leto played Niander Wallace, for some reason. His scenes were amongst the longest and most tedious. They went on and on with the dullest dialogue in the whole film.
I since found out that Director Denis Villeneuve is also responsible for Sicario and Arrival. If I'd known beforehand I wouldn't have bothered going to see the third film in his 'Trilogy of Tripe'.
Don't go out of your way to see this. Stay at home and watch the 1982 original, it's so much better.
Suicide Squad (2016)
Very disappointing
I'm not a comic book fan (graphic novel?! Yeah, right!) so know nothing about the original story or characters.
The trailer made the film look amazing! Great action, explosions, design etc. It turned out that the trailer contained all the best parts of the film and was enough for you to say you'd now seen 'Suicide Squad'.
By far the highlight of the film was Margot Robbie. She continues to show shy she is a first class Hollywood draw and one of the most beautiful women in the World. Her performance as 'Harley Quinn' contained scenes of humour, fear, anger etc etc etc and all were brilliant. Her backside got plenty of screen time, probably more through design than luck.
Well Smith played his usual role of Will Smith.
Cara Delevingne, who I'd never heard of and was surprised to hear is a model, was very wooden. I'm sure a far better casting choice could have been made.
A lot of the earlier scenes jumped around and made little sense. There were several lines of speech that were incoherent.
The film did not live up to the trailer, the storyline was thin and short-lived.
It wasn't a terrible film, but it's not great. In the long run it will be remembered as another edition to the long list of poor DC Comic films like the terrible 90's Batman films and all the awful Superman films. The future releases don't look good either. It was nowhere near as bad as Batman v Superman!
Ghostbusters (2016)
Who you gonna call? Not you...
This does contain a spoiler, but not enough to spoil this film any more than it does on its own.
I've spent much of the last few hours trying to think of films I've seen that are as bad as this. I can only think of a few (Mr Nanny, Hellraiser Revelations, Jaws 3D, Gothic). The only two highlights of the film consisted of Dan Ackroyd's brief cameo and that the film eventually ended.
Bill Murray's appearance, as paranormal 'debunker' Martin Heiss (too close to Martin Weiss!) was an utter waste of his talents. I hope he was being paid well.
This film was always going to be compared to the original, and it doesn't compare at all. The cast are horrendous! I've never seen any of the four main 'actors' before, and never want to see them again. Every one of them made me cringe with their appalling performances.
I'd heard a while ago that the film would cast four women as the Ghostbusters, and that would have been a great move if the casting was better.
Melissa McCarthy was dreadful throughout. I didn't know her name but am informed that she was the 'awful American' that made 'Spy' unwatchable last year. Kate McKinnon (never heard of her) was difficult to understand at times and cringe-worthy most of the time. Leslie Jones (never heard of her) was annoying every time she opened her mouth. I'm surprised she was happy with this role; it was awful and generally pointless. Kristen Wiig (never head of her) was poor and unsure if her character was intelligent or not, and put in a far too weak performance for a lead role. Possibly the weakest of the four, but not by much.
There must have been four better actors that could have been cast than these!
Dan Ackroyd suggested these are the best in female comedy. If this is the case then female comedy is extinct, Americans are no judges of what is funny (highly likely) or Dan needs to visit the UK where women make up a large percentage of the best comic talent on TV. US sitcoms might be able to get away with such poor attempts at (child) humour but movies need to be of a far better standard.
What Chris Hemsworth was doing by accepting his role I don't know. I'd have expected a lot better from him. Charles Dance appears. What on Earth is he doing in this awful film?! Who played the villain?! Don't know his name and don't want to. Easily forgettable and best kept that way.
The script is terrible. There were 3 or 4 scenes of pointless gibberish which could have easily been cut and not impacted on the storyline, for what it is. The attempted humour is very noticeable as being 'American'. The 'humour' consists of saying silly things in silly voices or accents, making stupid noises, dancing around like idiots and a fart. It's pathetic at best.
The original theme song, by Ray Parker Jnr, did get a very quick play early in the film. Later on a cover version, which is an assault on anyone's hearing, was played. The original soundtrack was unique and suits the film very well. Its modern equivalent would have only been improved by its total absence.
The special effects seemed to be influenced more by Ghostbusters 2 than its predecessor. The early appearance of a ghost was a clear nod to the original, as well as the Marsh Mallow Man's cameo. The affects were good but don't appear to have come far from the early 1990's. Another ghosts appeared to have been of a criminal executed by electric chair. This appeared to be a reference to the Ghostbusters 2 courtroom scene.
Any self-respecting Ghostbusters fan will NOT add this awful waste of space to their DVD collection. If I had gone to see the film on my own I'd have walked out well before the end. We need to hope that this film is a complete flop otherwise we'll be assaulted with a sequel.
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)
Boredom v Cringing
The Justice League may pre-date The Avengers in comic book version but they trail way behind on the big screen.
I assume the aim was to make this film as 'dark' as The Dark Knight trilogy, and aim not met. The film fails to hold the interest like Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, and The Dark Knight Rises and doesn't have a patch of the storyline of these films.
It took years for Batman to become 'cool' thanks to Christian Bale's portrayal of the character. The appalling 60's TV series and a series of equally awful films starring the likes of Michael Keaton, Jack Nicholson, Val Kilmer and George Clooney made Batman as big a joke as Superman and Wonder Woman.
Ben Affleck has had to take over from Bale, a massive ask made more difficult in a terrible film with little in the way of a plot and playing opposite two of comic books daftest creations. If it wasn't for this Affleck would make a good Batman.
Superman has been a joke character since the awful films of the 1970's and 80's. Man of Steel was an attempt to make him a series character, it only produced a boring film about an alien in blue spandex, this time without his underpants over his clothes.
Wonder Woman is a shockingly poor character in any shape or form and this film doesn't change that.
Jeremy Irons takes over from Michael Caine in the role of 'Alfred' and is awful in every scene he ruins. He is now Bruce Wayne's technical adviser.
The casting and performances were generally terrible. The script was horrendous with a lot pointless, and meaningless, chatter. Lex Luther was practically incoherent all the way through the movie, as well as the most cringe-worthy part of the whole film.
The fight scenes were difficult to see. They moved too fast and the camera jerked about so they were hard to follow. The fight between Batman and Superman, in which Batman is the victor, was the only highlight surrounded by tedium.
Most worryingly was the time taken to hint at the next few films in the franchise to be released over the next few years. All ones to avoid. It didn't mention Suicide Squad, released later this year, which is apparently part of the franchise and may be the only bright spark among them.
What parts of the film I wasn't bored through I spent cringing.
It's a terrible film.
Jaws 3-D (1983)
Terrible
There is no spoiler in this review, there is no storyline to spoil.
I have seen many lists supposedly giving the top 10 worst films ever made but why is Jaws 3 not in there?
There is nothing special about the effects, they are dreadful. The acting is so poor it can hardly be called acting and everyone in the cast is over shadowed by the dolphins. How several of the cast members went on to have good careers is amazing.
There is no tension at all in any of the scenes.
This film has no right to be associated with Jaws or Jaws 2. If you're a fan of these first two films don't waste your time or eyesight on this one.
Ex Machina (2014)
Ex Machina - Ex Cellent
An excellent and thought provoking film.
The film moves at a good pace throughout getting to the main storyline early on. The most noticeable aspects of the film early on are the location, sets and special affects.
Though the main character, Ava, has an attractive human face it is quite clear from the rest of her body that she is indeed a machine. This is central to the role and storyline, I shall say no more as to why.
Domhnall Gleeson plays 'Caleb' and takes us through the film, leading us along the way to a conclusion that is eventually twisted at the end. Though he is very good in the role he is over shadowed by Oscar Isaac (Nathan) who created Ava, superbly played by Alicia Vikander, who over shadows them both.
I have seen that there are some exciting films being released this year but they will have to go a very long way to better this one.
A Very Peculiar Practice (1986)
A Very Peculiar Practice
I'd never heard of this program, it was only luck that I found out about it recently. The link is 'Drop the Dead Donkey'. Haydn Gwynne made a brief speaking appearance in the first series with Trevor Cooper whilst David Troughton (Roy Merchant Jnr) and they're not the only ones...
For a comedy the program isn't all that funny. There are a few laugh-out-loud moments, most coming delivered by the excellent Graham Crowden.
The theme music is terrible.
Some of the bit-parts are interesting. In the first series, 1986, Kathy Burke makes a very brief appearance and Hugh Grant appears as a preacher.
One character goes to see a doctor and explains that he owes the BBC £17k for reasons 'I can't quite understand'. This was closely based on Andrew Davies' own experiences. The same character went in to Dr Daker as he'd had his foot run over in the car park by a nun.
The nuns were a strange addition to the program, appearing in every episode (I believe!).
The casting is quite good, the main characters having been well chosen and the script is of a very good standard.
The program is extremely watchable. I have lost several hours watching one episode after another.
Gothic (1986)
Gothic?!
This ranks as one of the worst films I've ever had the misfortune to watch.
The subject matter is something I find fascinating, a period when the two greatest Gothic characters were conceived and this is the best they could come up with to bring this time to life?! I thought more of Natasha Richardson and Timothy Spall than to stoop as low as productions of such poor quality.
If a subject interests you enough that you would make a film about it why would you do such a horrendous job of it?! The first thing you notice is how terrible the soundtrack is. Even by the standards of 1986 the music sounds like cheap, out-of-date electronics all of which fail to capture any mood in the film.
It soon follows that you notice how terrible the performances of the 'actors' are with everyone but Richardson over-acting and 'hamming' up their parts, making them all seem overly eccentric.
If you have the chance to watch this film don't bother! Read Mary Shelley's 'Frankenstein' in stead. It'll take a lot longer but will be a far less waste of your time than this film.
Beneath Hill 60 (2010)
Beneath Hill 60
I'd not heard of this film until my Dad produced a copy of it on DVD he'd bought for a few £ in a supermarket. I watched it this evening.
A superb film! I've seen a few films made by Australia about their military history and this is by far the best.
The cast is great, some of the scenes underground are as claustrophobic as a good submarine film.
The realism, as I would assume having not been at the front during the Great War, was spectacular. Everyone must have been caked in mud for the making of this film.
The scenes with characters coming under fire were as good as some of those in 'Saving Private Ryan' as was the tension as they dodged the bullets (or not).
My only criticism is the change in volume, I was constantly turning the volume up as they whispered and turning it down to protect my hearing. This is not reason enough to not recommend this film.
Transformers: Age of Extinction (2014)
A sequel too far
I was really looking forward to this film, I have all the others on DVD and enjoyed them. I was left disappointed.
The casting was quite good and at least one of the annoying/eccentric 'comic' characters was killed off early on.
The film was far too long, there were several very boring and completely pointless scenes.
The special affects were top quality for most of the film, though several of the fight sequences were difficult to follow because the scene moved around rather than focused on what was happening.
There seemed to be a huge amount of product placement throughout the film, and not just for the vehicles.
For a film with such an allegedly high budget I would expect a far better film. I'm sure the new Transformer designs and characters will make a fortune for the franchise and, unfortunately, go some way to encouraging backers for the next films, which was set-up at the end of this film.