thedarkbaron-52942 Reviews

Spectral Force (1998– )

And there is only one lower. Maybe...

[1/10 · 24 April 2022]

Neverland... heh, lol. Wow...

...Anyway, I still can't believe ADV films would actually allow their name to be mentioned on the same cover art as this monstrosity not to mention even green lighting this thing at all. Make no mistake, Spectral Force is nothing short of a disaster that goes completely wrong in every category you can think of. I still hold Art of Fighting as the absolute worst anime I have ever seen, and its held that title on lock for about well over a decade. At this point, I kind of think it's never going to be dethroned; but Spectral Force is one of those anime titles that introduces whole new levels of suck in its own way, and it's pretty damn close to giving the aforementioned title a run for the championship. In any case, it's definitely in my top 3 of worst anime I have ever seen and this is no exaggeration.

Spectral Force is a fantasy anime based on a video game (well imagine that!) that suffers from a very poor sense of direction. The anime has enough plot twist and characters to fit a 26 episode series format, which is beyond bad since the thing clocks in at 50 minutes. Many situations occur, many characters attempt to do different things, many battles take place, and almost nothing is properly fleshed out or concluded all that well.

Let's see, I'll begin with the characters. Well for one thing, there are just way too many of them, and none of them are interesting in the least. They're just all around terrible and only one is somewhat developed. I already forgot the name of the main character, and I can't quite recall if all of the others were even named at all. The anime attempts to accomplish so many things, but turns out rushing and cramming everything in by the end which results in a truncated opened ending.

For a fantasy anime there is just no creativity or imagination at all. The broken and busted plot limps into one segment after the other, and the horrendous character interactions have absolutely no energy; this is mainly due to yeah, the horrible characters of course, but it's also because of the atrocious dialouge and voice acting. The writing is just awful; characters who appear to play in the major story soon fall into bit roles after playing in a major sequence, and it's also unclear on who is the real threat. Supposedly, the humans are the worst of the three evils, while the demons are the worlds best hope. If this is the case; then why is the human who discovers the sword considered a hero? Could this thing be playing off the adage; one person's patriot is another one's terrorist? I doubt this completely since the entire work has been mapped out so poorly.

Visually, it's just as horrible as everything else. For a 2003 anime OVA, there is just no excuse for visuals like this. The animation does not blend well with the CG, in fact, I don't think they tried to blend it at all. The backgrounds are CG and the character designs are just there, it's hard to explain just how bad this looks at times. Forget about decent action scenes, a lot of it is poorly choreographed, while the rest is unseen with stills on static backgrounds, and if that isn't bad enough there's even one scene where a still character is slowly moving in the background to its desired point. Can you believe something like this? Outside of the wretched ending theme, I didn't even notice the BGM.

It's said to understand Spectral Force one must be familiar with the game. This is never a good approach. Video games to movies really should have content that appeals to both parties; fans and non fans. If developers are only going to bother with fans of the game, then perhaps they should start bundling these movies with their video game counter-part to spare the non fans unnecessary suffering; but seriously speaking, even if this wasn't based on a video game it really wouldn't be any better.

After watching more than 400 anime titles, I can say Spectral Force is too close to the very bottom of the barrel. Honestly, the only reason why I consider Art of Fighting worse is because I would have to watch it again to be completely sure, and I have no desire to do that. All jokes aside, you can walk into any anime section and pick up something better than this blindfolded. Avoid.

Prom Night (1980)

One of those cult classics I can do without.

[1/10 · 24 April 2022]

Released in 1980, Prom Night was one among many horror slashers that appeared during the slasher craze of the 80's. For some reason, people (like me) were highly fascinated by watching someone taking that knife in disturbing ways from a deranged individual coupled by the suspense and intricate plot that would grip the audience even further. Unfortunately, Prom Night directed by Paul Lynch doesn't have too much of the former, and the latter is handled way too poorly. Read on to see what I think of this cult classic.

Lynch had what he needed to create a decent enough, suspense filled "whodunit?". There were a few red herrings tossed out there to keep the audience guessing on who could've possibly been making the phone calls, but when taking under consideration the possible motive to want these grown kids and the development of one character, predicting on who the possible killer could be really wasn't that hard. However, the major problem wasn't the predictability or even the acting surprisingly. It was the boring plot that could actually make watching grass grow seem like damn good fun; to call Prom Night one boring horror slasher is an understatement.

During a good portion of the movie, what we're given are plenty of character interactions to some how try and complicate this tedious plot. Outside of maybe two effective moments. The plot is littered with weak scenes that really did nothing for me despite them being attempts at character development. Now, there's nothing wrong with character development but if we're not dealing with complex characters then something needs to happen to keep the plot interesting, a death or three might not have been a bad thing.

When the movie eventually gets to the kills most of the death scenes really didn't seem to be a good enough pay off considering what the audience went through to get there. However, I will give credit to the set pieces where the deaths took place. They were genuinely creepy, and the thought of teens being knocked off at their prom surrounded by so many people is a frightening thought; but I kind of think that Jamie Lee Curtis' disco moves were the true horror here.

The acting is alright at best with some B-level performances. The solid performances from Leslie Nielson as the school principle whose role was way too small, and Jamie Lee Curtis as the dead girls elder sister were not enough to save this tired script. Outside of the disco track during the end, I didn't even really notice the BGM and I honestly cannot comment on it. There really wasn't much concerning the death scenes, they either occurred rather quick, or took place off screen. In other words, the gore is nothing to freak out over.

The ending is a nice pay off for those who couldn't guess the killer's identity immediately, plus I give credit to the dramatic build up leading to the final act. However, Prom Night is a very bad slasher to me because it failed to keep me interested with a good plot. I was one of those who thought a remake was necessary, because there was so much that could have been worked on. Silly me for even thinking that, since the 2008 remake was far worse than this in every way imaginable. If you're looking for a horror slasher with a solid plot that will keep you guessing, then I recommend Alice, Sweet Alice. If serious gore is your thing, then The Burning will no doubt be your cup of blood.

The Battery (2012)

This Battery needed a lot more juice.

[3/10 · 23 April 2022]

Written and directed by Jeremy Gardener, The Battery is a 2012 zombie holocaust film that follows the whole buddy cop like formula. It's said that Gardener had a very small budget to work with on this film and it definitely shows. However, I will admit that he managed to work very well with his characters creating a believable drama. The movie is all about the characters and mildly works with its atmosphere, and due to this and its limited budget the zombie action takes a gigantic backseat. Some people seem to be perfectly fine with this for whatever reasons.

I found the characters to be likable and this will always be a plus for me in these type of movies. Ben is more of a realist, and due to a past situation he seems to be perfectly fine with being a wanderer and has adjusted to his new surroundings. Mickey chooses to lose himself by constantly getting lost in his earphones to music. It's pretty interesting on how this plays out due to their constant and at times entertaining dialog. This film feels a lot less like a zombie holocaust and more of these two simply trying to live in this new nightmarish world; as they cling on to the one thing they both loved which is baseball. The two would frequently play catch and would even have drinks. People whom would claim this behavior to be unrealistic are simply too use to the usual zombie cliché characters. Escapism is one of the primary stress relievers, and these two are in a highly stressful situation.

While the characters remain interesting, Gardener clearly shows that he has very little to work with as many scenes between the two are simply too long, and he goes back to making a point that was already made a dozen times over, and seriously let's be real people; we as zombie and horror fans watch these movies for the overall zombie carnage, and this movie simply doesn't deliver there at all. Either kills are off screen or they're too simply pulled off. There is no pay off whatsoever during a zombie encounter and for me this is an issue and always will be. The soundtrack had its place in terms of character development, but I couldn't shake that this movie felt like a promotion for new artist, and that's how in your face the music tends to be. It was quite annoying at times for me.

At the end of the day I commend Gardener for attempting something I would say to be unique and different, but this movie really doesn't deserve all the glowing praise it gets, and at least I don't think it's the best of this type and low budget just isn't a good defense for a movie like this. It took some talent for sure, yet at the same time if you don't have the money for a movie. I think it's best not to always try and make one. For those whom believe this type of zombie film to be the best thing since pants with pockets. I highly suggest watching the Ford Brothers 2010 zombie apocalypse film, The Dead. It focuses heavily on its characters as well, handles its setting much better, there's better atmosphere, serious in tone, no over the top zombies with special powers, and above all else, it has some incredible zombie action. Quite frankly, I believe it blows this away. Give this movie a shot anyway if it sounds like it can be your thing.

The Last Exorcism (2010)

Doubters will be doubters until the end?

[7/10 · 23 April 2022]

To begin with, I never could understand the hate behind the documentary style of films. I never really noticed the shaky cameras until others began mentioning it, and it still never really bothered me. The Last Exorcism is a supernatural horror film that is heavily influenced by the mockumentary style of the Blair Witch Project. The film follows and is narrated by Reverend Marcus in a POV manner, and it attempts to feel like the real deal. However, there are more than enough moments that proves it to be nothing more than a movie.

From the very beginning, the film finds a solid foundation. Before the actual plot takes place, Stamm gives the viewer a guided tour into random town-folks superstition, which borders into the complete eerie as well as the absurd; ranging from things like "that's the gates to hell over there", and even the UFO landing site. This actually helps flesh out the character of Marcus, and provides more of a reasoning to support the stance in his lack of faith, as well as brushing these people off as nothing more than loony individuals.

Now speaking of character development, it's in bundles and it never begins to wane. Reverend Marcus has that "it" factor when it comes down to owning the crowd. The viewer gets to know his personality inside and out. Also working in his favor, everything about the man seems very real and it's easy to relate to him. The rest of the cast is just about as engaging, with Nell Sweetzer (Ashley Bell) being another clear standout. Her innocence and ignorance of what exactly is happening to her can play on the viewers emotions. Iris (Iris Bahr) and Daniel (Adam Grimes) who make up the two person camera crew aren't left out of the picture. Various times in some way or another, they express their fear of the situation and only want to get the hell out of there. In regards to a horror film, I can't remember a cast that was this realistic. I mean everything that they do, and whatever changes occurs feels believable.

The acting is far above the usual B-horror movie. The main players continue to shine in their roles. Nell's father Louis Sweetzer (Louis Herthum) is very convincing in his role, as the over religious fanatic that will do anything necessary to see this demon out of his daughter. These type of fanatics always did rub me in the wrong way, so I can say that his performance was indeed felt.

The Last Exorcism manages to work its horror elements rather well, by delivering some genuine creepy moments. Stamm uses simple techniques to set an uneasy mood, and doesn't rely on out of the blue, yet very predictable cheap scares. He uses characters emotions and half lit set pieces to achieve his desired effect. I was also amazed to see that the special effects were practically non-existant. There's a small amount of gore that itsn't very over the top, but along with the death scenes, they prove to be very effective.

The Last Exorcism has a very strong story and engrossing plot. Stamm hits on Christian beliefs concerning the origin of the Devil, his demons, and God; but my attention was mainly piqued during his evaluation of false prophets, in which, Reverend Marcus clearly is. He also hit on the age old Christian belief, that doubters will be doubters until either the end, or unless something out of the ordinary that cannot be explained by science should occur.

I didn't have many issues with the camera work. Stamm was able to bring out the best in some scenes. However, it felt too much like a movie at times. When the camera man was told to shut it off. It was unsure how the scenes were still being filmed, and it would lose that documentary like feel. This was something that the Blair Witch Project worked to perfection. It always felt like a real documentary and never like a movie.

Although Stamm appeared to have a vision, and the film does have moments where it shines. I couldn't help but notice that there's missed potential. There were suspenseful moments that were well built that could have helped add to the realism of the film, but it seemed as if he didn't exactly know how to finish them. It's hard to elaborate without spoiling the film, something I will not do. The ending also felt too Blair Witch-ish. It was building up to a strong ending, but the end result felt too rushed as if Stamm just ran out of time.

In closing, although The Last Exorcism has its rough edges, the solid acting and believable characters were enough to keep me gripped. I recommend this to those who are into supernatural horror with a demonic possession backdrop.

Zombie (1979)

Insanely over-rated like a majority of Fulci's work.

[6/10 · 7 February 2021]

The title cult classic alone is frightening enough at times these days but when cult classic is mentioned in the same breath with Lucio Fulci, it's down right terrifying for me. Face it, the term cult classic a majority of the time means "garbage that I like", and Fulci's films developed a reputation for a lot of people as being garbage that some people like. At least to me, Zombie directed by Lucio Fulci doesn't fall into the garbage category but it's cutting it somewhat close. This film actually gets worst every time I watch it.

There are two reasons why I somewhat enjoy Zombie. The first reason has to be the zombies appearance. I have never seen a real zombie before however I'm sure if I saw these; I would more than likely be frozen in my tracks in the first encounter. The make up artist out did themselves here. I would go so far to say that Zombie actually raised the bar on what a zombie should look like and up to this day even though a couple are very close, I haven't seen a zombie film yet that can really compare. I haven't seen them all but I've seen a lot. I mean these zombies truly look like the living dead. They are completely decayed with earth worms running out the eyes. The make up is excellent. Zombie definitely overachieved in its style.

Reason number two is the gore. You have the famous eyeball scene, a few zombie all you can eat buffets, and some good killing altogether. The zombies take some realistic and flesh eating bites. The film definitely gave me what I want in a zombie movie which is humans and zombies killing each other. This is another area where Zombie overachieved for me.

Unfortunately, like almost of Fulci's films that I've seen. He gets a few things right, but overall his films are very hard to sit through. I still cannot seem to understand what was the purpose behind a zombie fighting a shark. I find this scene worthless and nothing short of stupid. I do not find it anywhere near "cool" or "awesome". To include, the characters are just too unrealistic even for a horror film. While heading towards the end when the surviving main characters are fighting the undead. The doctor whom has been killing these creatures for god knows how long. Never shares the info that a bullet to the head is what takes them down for good. I'm not exactly sure about this. But is it possible that could have been valuable information? Nah... Not at all.

This is an Italian film, so don't expect much from the acting, in which I wasn't impressed at all anyway. There are some creepy moments with the most notable being the very first scene. I believe this scene which took place at the boat had the best build up in the movie. Since the viewer already knows the basic premise is a zombie attack. The very cramped quarters does an excellent job building suspense. You know something is going to happen. You just don't know when and how. Unfortunately, the film also has some boring moments due to its pacing. I found the pacing pretty bad but when things finally picked up the film no longer became a serious chore to watch.

Many fans advise possible viewers when it comes down to Italian films, Fulci's among many, one should forget the story and plot, and just watch the gore and laugh. Perhaps this is the secret to fool themselves into believing that Fulci was actually a genius and most Italian horror is actually art. Well, some of these folks have been telling themselves that for more than thirty years. I just wonder how many actually believe it.

I highly recommend Zombie to die hard zombie maniacs, Fulci, and Italian horror fans. Since I'm a zombie maniac I suppose this will forever be a part of my collection, but don't ever expect me to call it great or a classic heaven forbid. This is a guilty pleasure and nothing more.

Who Can Kill a Child? (1976)

Masterpiece? More like a mass of pieces.

[1/10 · 7 February 2021]

In the world of film, there is always something out there which requires the viewer to leave his or her brain somewhere on the shelf. The horror genre more than any other medium, far beyond average action flicks and animation doesn't just expect its fan base to lower their intelligence a lot at times. Oh no way, they expect us to be near brain dead. Now don't get me wrong, I'm a huge fan of horror. It's actually my third favorite genre, but sometimes I come across a stinker that is so bad, it forces me to take a long hiatus from the genre, or sometimes gives me the feel to abandon it altogether. Who Can Kill A Child? directed by Narcisco Ibanez Serrador has driven me to consider going these routes.

Now since this film wants to be taken seriously; I'm not going to show it any mercy. Who Can Kill A Child? to me, is a very bad film sadly mistaken as an unappreciated, misunderstood, masterpiece(wow, I kind of think I'm reviewing a Fulci film right now), and it is so over-rated. The film does accomplish a few things but the glaring flaws holds this film back a lot. I mean the flaws in this film are in your face but fans either don't see them, or they choose to ignore them. I'm assuming the latter which is almost always the case.

Ok the strengths first, Who Can Kill A Child? has some solid acting. I really can't knock the performances. The kids definitely stood out at times with their very innocent yet cold demeanor. The film also has its disturbing moments that brings out the horror in the film. The children actually have a good time with their victims. It almost seems as if they believe their actions aren't wrong. The gore is pretty well done and one scene is simply terrible to watch but well deserving.

Now for the negatives and this is where I'm going to straight rip this to pieces. The driving force behind any serious film are the characters. The main characters are so unrealistic that I honestly didn't care for their fates before the middle of the film.

Tom and Evelyn both witness a child club an old man to death. Tom soon intervenes and then carries the mans corpse off. Only just to witness in seconds, the mans beaten body to be used in a game of pinata by the kids. Instead of Tom planning escape or at least seek rescue(mind you, his wife is pregnant). He comes back and twist the story plus have a drink. Now go ahead and try to correct me(the fans), by saying, "you missed the point" or "Tom was in shock". I didn't miss the point, and Tom did what he did because he is a bumbling fool, and his mindless, unrealistic, un... regular normal people like actions in the very next scene is the proof. I mean seriously, what's the point of character development when the characters are so unrealistic in the first place? And before someone dares mention, "Hey it's horror, the characters are suppose to be unrealistic". That's true, if you're watching Friday the 13th or the Bride of Chucky, but when something is being hailed as "thought provoking" or "serious work of art", then character development must be ace. End of story.

During this point in the movie, I thought to myself, "so far so horrible", but I still had hope until the contradicting theme. At first, I actually thought having Tom's wife pregnant was an interesting plot device. However, this was also poorly used, very poorly used. I'm sure it could be difficult to kill a child, but there isn't a parent alive whom would jeopardize the safety of their own unborn child to protect or keep from killing a mob of children, with weapons trying to kill them and their child. This also heavily effected the character development on Evelyn's part, and as a result made me sympathize with her less. I feel if the writers wanted to play on the characters emotions thoroughly to the point where it could have been believable then Evelyn shouldn't have been pregnant. I just cannot comprehend a pregnant woman not putting her child's safety first. That just doesn't happen unless the woman is on drugs, and Evelyn appeared pretty clean to me.

The film only continues to drown in its own absurdity. The film misuses its metaphor that it set out so hard to inject into the film at the very beginning. The film opens up with some very disturbing footage containing the atrocities against children during war. Of course, it's possible for someone to feel sympathy for children whom are victims of disease, famine, and used for pet projects. Thus, making you wonder who can kill a child? But what exactly was the connection here? Why should I feel sympathy for this group of cold blooded murderers? What exactly did these children specifically go through? There is a reason to kill them and that reason is survival. So what does that footage accomplish? Perhaps I just don't get it, or just maybe there is nothing to get.

I hate this movie. I hate it on almost every single level. Who Can Kill A Child? continued to disappoint and aggravate me. Mister Unrealistic Tom was unrealistic to the bitter end. He is such a fool, and his actions along with Evelyn's in combination with RiffTrax could actually make this watchable.

I'm not going to say that I'm amazed by the accolades this film receives. One thing I noticed is that horror fans will praise almost anything that comes from overseas in the form of horror. To a certain degree I can understand them, but this garbage is not the answer. I'm aware there are things I love that people feel are trash and that's fine with me, but this film to me is one of the worst horror films I have ever seen, and I didn't come into this with built up expectations either. I considered the sources before I tortured myself with this. Therefore, I came into this completely neutral like I do everything.

I also see where the idea of Children of the Corn came from which is another very horrible movie in my view too. The only film off the top of my head that successfully depicted children gone wild had to be Eden Lake. Despite the very disturbing ending of the that film. I found that to be a far better watch. Now that's unappreciated and misunderstood but I won't call it a masterpiece though. I recommend that way before this.