Ghostbusters (2016) & Poltergeist (2015) Reviews

I guess it’s about time I do two pointless reviews of two pointless remakes (well, I suppose Ghostbusters is a reboot). Here we go! Get ready for some bitching…

Ghostbusters (2016)

Directed by Paul Feig

Based on Ghostbusters by Ivan Reitman, Dan Aykroyd & Harold Ramis

Starring: Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wiig, Kate McKinnon, Leslie Jones, Charles Dance, Michael K. Williams, Chris Hemsworth

Plot Synopsis: (via IMDB)
Following a ghost invasion of Manhattan, paranormal enthusiasts Erin Gilbert and Abby Yates, nuclear engineer Jillian Holtzmann, and subway worker Patty Tolan band together to stop the otherworldly threat.

My Opinion:

To be fair, this isn’t the worst movie ever. I’m a bit of a snob about remakes & reboots & all that, though, so I’m normally a total bitch about them. Especially when they f*^k with my favorites from the Seventies & Eighties!! And the 1984 Ghostbusters is a classic. However, it’s one of those I’d always seen as a classic in my mind but hadn’t actually rewatched it in years. Until a couple of weeks ago. Um… Will I get in trouble for saying it hasn’t aged well? More than anything, I was surprised at how much I disliked Bill Murray’s “sexist in that 1980’s sort of way that we all just accepted as the norm back then” character and the way he hogged so much screen time. But I do like Murray. I’m also not exactly going to complain about some outdated values in the original as I’d be a total hypocrite since my favorite thing about the reboot was Chris Hemsworth being funny & hot. But mostly hot.

Ghostbusters 2016 was okay. I don’t remember a lot of it now as I find most comedy movies to be throwaway, forgettable entertainment. I’m not saying I don’t like comedy films – I just like a very small number of them as I’ve found so few of them to actually be funny (especially nowadays). But comedy is probably the most divisive genre, followed very closely by horror, so you’re never going to please everyone with a movie like this.

Was this movie so hated because it rebooted a beloved classic or because it starred women? It’s a combination of both. I get really angry myself anytime they try to remake/reboot one of my favorites but I also can’t imagine there having been quite as much uproar if this reboot had starred whatever male comedians happen to be big at the moment. Yes, I’m totally out of touch & can’t even name any… Also, don’t forget that things like Saturday Night Live & a lot of other US TV shows that these comedians often come from aren’t shown outside of America. British hubby often has to remind me of this, even though I’ve now not seen SNL in 15 years, so you have to realize that things like the original Ghostbusters were probably viewed differently outside the US where these actors weren’t already loved. Or hated – It can also work in a movie’s favor to have no prior knowledge of an actor’s work. I don’t know what my point is here?! I think it may be that, in this case, it worked slightly in my favor to not know much about these stars’ TV careers.

I’ve of course seen a few Melissa McCarthy & Kristen Wiig films and I wouldn’t call myself a fan of either of them. Wiig is a bit “meh” for me while I hated McCarthy at first but she’s kind of grown on me thanks to times when she’s been a little less “outrageous”. Okay okay – and thanks to her lip sync battle on Jimmy Fallon where she did Colors Of The Wind. My kid is obsessed with that – I’ve probably seen that YouTube video 20 times. That was funny. She may be growing on me but I still won’t be watching shit like Spy, etc. Wiig & McCarthy were both perfectly fine in this film, probably since they were more subdued. I know almost nothing about Kate McKinnon & Leslie Jones and I found them fairly funny as well. Especially McKinnon, who I have seen in some SNL clips online. We do at least get to see some YouTube clips! Oh, and I love McCarthy as Sean Spicer.

Okay, I’m bored with this review. I didn’t hate this movie but it’s not “good” and is still just another completely pointless reboot. I think I’m just annoyed with society in general these days. I love Twitter but some days I go on there and think “What the FUCK is wrong with people?!?!?!” and wish we could go back to a time when we weren’t exposed to so much disgusting hatred on a daily basis. I mean, we knew lots of people were assholes in the Eighties but they didn’t provide us daily written proof. My point is this: this movie is a bit sucky & pointless but the anger was over the top. My further point is this: Bridesmaids has a 6.8 IMDb rating & The Hangover has a 7.8. I don’t like either movie as that sort of silly, gross-out comedy isn’t my type of thing. However, they’re both good examples of that specific genre and are very similar. So why is one a whole point higher than the other?! Hmm. I wonder. Especially as, if I had to say which is the better written film of the two and if I was forced to admit which one made me laugh a tiny bit, Bridesmaids wins hands down in both cases. So… Huh? Therefore, I’m giving Ghostbusters a point more than it deserves because 1) I think it’s been rated slightly too low overall because it starred women so, fuck it, I’ll up it a bit and 2) Chris Hemsworth in glasses is the prettiest thing I’ve ever seen.

My Rating: 6/10

**Also, I freaking loved Freaks And Geeks so guess I can’t hate Paul Feig too much…..

Poltergeist (2015)

Directed by Gil Kenan

Based on Poltergeist by Tobe Hooper & Steven Spielberg

Starring: Sam Rockwell, Rosemarie DeWitt, Jared Harris, Jane Adams

Plot Synopsis: (via IMDB)
A family whose suburban home is haunted by evil forces must come together to rescue their youngest daughter after the apparitions take her captive.

My Opinion:

These were meant to be two quickie reviews but then I rambled on about Ghostbusters for ages so I’ll keep this quick: Poltergeist (2015) just plain sucks. No, it probably doesn’t help that I love the original Poltergeist (more than the original Ghostbusters) but, holy shit – let’s just take an absolute horror classic and water it down and make it boring as shit and just plain suck the fucking soul out of it!

This movie adds absolutely nothing new to the original. It’s just another standard, run-of-the-mill, predictable & forgettable PG-13 horror. And with a fucking weird final scene that I think is meant to be funny but feels totally tacked on & out of place. Just…. No. NO. Just stop. Just stop, Hollywood. Come up with some original fucking ideas. AND ALL OF US! STOP! We need to stop encouraging this shit. They keep making this shit because it makes money. We’re to blame! Oh, that’s right – Society sucks now. Fuck it! We deserve nothing better than Poltergeist (2015). Hell, it’s better than we deserve. We deserve to be forced to watch Battlefield Earth with our eyes propped open Clockwork-Orange-style until the day we all finally destroy each other.

My Rating: 4/10

**I’ve never actually seen Battlefield Earth. Also, if you want to see a great Sam Rockwell in something good, watch The Way Way Back. NOT THAT ANY OF US DESERVE IT!

Advertisements

It (2017) Review

Welcome to Day Three of Stephen King Week! King turns 70 tomorrow so I’m posting something King-related all week. One book review (End Of Watch), two movie reviews, and two Top Ten lists (including My Top Ten Stephen King Movies). Today I’m reviewing the recent It film.

It (2017)

Directed by Andy Muschietti

Based on It by Stephen King

Starring: Jaeden Lieberher, Bill Skarsgård, Jeremy Ray Taylor, Sophia Lillis, Finn Wolfhard, Wyatt Oleff, Chosen Jacobs, Jack Dylan Grazer, Nicholas Hamilton, Jackson Robert Scott

Plot Synopsis: (via Wikipedia)
The film tells the story of seven children in Derry, Maine, who are terrorized by the eponymous being, only to face their own personal demons in the process.

My Opinion:

Is it weird that I’m so happy that this film is kicking ass at the box office?? I just love it when one of King’s books actually gets a good film adaptation and, even better, when it gets a lot of really positive reviews. I did a list yesterday of My Top Ten Stephen King Movies (this film was at number five if you don’t feel like clicking that link). I admitted in that list that, while I always watch & enjoy all adaptations of King’s work, some of the movies have been pretty damn awful. But then we occasionally get masterpieces like The Shawshank Redemption & Stand By Me to make up for the bad ones. It (the film – such a confusing title!) isn’t quite up there with the likes of those two but I’m very happy to say that it’s easily one of the better Stephen King movies of the many that have been made. Yes! I love when the movies do his novels justice.

You’ve all probably seen reviews by now that compare this to Stand By Me and that’s a very accurate description. Stand By Me with added horror, of course. Like that, this is a coming of age tale first and foremost and I’ve always loved a good coming of age tale. That’s why I’m actually a bit surprised that this film has done as well as it has as I can’t see it being loved by full-on “horror” fans. Pennywise the clown is a great creation but I have to say that I don’t find either this or the 1990 version scary. The book is a bit unsettling but I wouldn’t say that feeling fully translated to the films. I’ve never been one to get too scared by movies, though. As far as “creepy” goes, Kubrick’s The Shining certainly has this film (and pretty much every other horror film) beat. It’s a shame that King hates that adaptation – I think it’s one of the greatest horror films of all time.

I think the main difference between the 1990 It and the 2017 It is that Tim Curry’s Pennywise is the true star of the 1990 film while the kids are what make the 2017 version so good. I think this version has done things right in focusing more on the kids & their relationships with one another. I will always be fond of the 1990 film & prefer Curry’s Pennywise to Bill Skarsgård’s somewhat dull (and a little too funny-looking) Pennywise. It felt like Curry was truly having fun in the role & his Pennywise had far more personality. But… This story is about the kids. It’s about all kids who felt like “losers” when growing up. Pennywise shouldn’t really be stealing the show and I’m glad this version gets the balance right in making the kids the stars while also giving us just enough of the monster to keep the story interesting.

The kids all did a great job in this film. As has been said, It has a very Stranger Things feel to it. But of course it would since The Duffer Brothers wanted to make It but went on to instead make Stranger Things, which is meant to feel like King meets Spielberg. Plus It used one of the same actors from that show (Finn Wolfhard, who bizarrely looks like The Shining’s Shelley Duvall). I have to say that the girl playing Beverly (Sophia Lillis) was especially good. She’s like a young Amy Adams (which is a compliment as I love Adams). I’d be surprised if Lillis, as well as most of the rest of this young cast, doesn’t go on to become a big star. However, I’m so glad they AREN’T big stars yet as having a cast of relatively unknown actors was a huge plus for this movie (in my opinion, anyway). I loved not having the distraction of having seen them in a million other things.


I do have to admit that the time period this is set in (1989 into 1990) was another huge plus for me in a way that may not work as well for the current younger generation. Or maybe that doesn’t matter? I loved Stand By Me & 1990’s It even though those kids were living in the late 1950s. I suppose the coming of age dramas tend to transcend their time period as kids that age still go through all the same sort of emotions. Although I found it kind of hilarious/scary reading this article about how the film’s director had to start a “bicycle camp” to teach these pre/early teen actors how to ride bikes for the film(!!).

But oh how I loved seeing kids the same age as me in this movie’s ’89/’90 time period. Well, sort of… I was the age of the slightly older bullies back then. And, like the bullies, I was also a huge fan of Anthrax. Anthrax! There’s an Anthrax song in this movie!!! But I’ll come back to that at the end of this review – I just want to point out that I was more like the kids being bullied than the ones doing the bullying, even though I was a metalhead. 😉 And I had way too much fun seeing the movie marquees in the film’s background accurately portraying the movie releases of that time (god I’m a nerd). And I enjoyed the fact that I could almost hear a massive WHOOSH in the cinema as the New Kids On The Block jokes went right over the heads of those in the audience. Not that I liked NKOTB… Anthrax!!! Oh, and there are lots of fun Easter Eggs in this film so, if you’re a King fan, be on the lookout for them. And read the IMDb trivia for the movie afterwards – there’s loads of fascinating info there.

I think I should try to wrap this up now or I’ll just continue to ramble on for ages. I’m clearly very happy with this adaptation of a favorite book by my absolute favorite author. The kids are fantastic, their characters are likeable (so rare in horror movies), there’s some Anthrax (and a few other soundtrack gems I won’t mention to keep some surprises), there’s a creepy clown who isn’t quite as cool as Tim Curry but still does the job, there are Stephen King and 1989/1990 pop culture references, poor little brother Georgie is still a cutie pie, “that” controversial scene from the book is thankfully again left out of the film, Sophia Lillis has true star power, the kids are the stars instead of the clown, this sentence is really long, and last but not least: this movie doesn’t rely on cheap horror movie “jump scares”. That’s not to say there aren’t some jumpy moments but I was impressed with how well the horror was handled. I especially loved the slideshow scene, which references a fantastic King novella in Four Past Midnight that really gave me the creeps. It focuses on telling its story and on its characters then it focuses on the horror. That’s what makes this a good film instead of yet another bland & predictable horror movie with expendable characters. I can’t wait to see the next film now, which will feature the kids as adults. However, as with the scenes involving the grown-ups in the 1990 film, I think the second film won’t have the same kind of magic as this one. There’s a special sort of innocence in these coming of age films and the ones that really capture that feeling end up being all-time favorites for some people. I know Stand By Me was that way for me when I was growing up & I can see It being that way for a new generation.

My Rating: 8.5/10

**Back to Anthrax, as promised**

As I said, I was a big Anthrax fan in my high school days and the fact that they had an Anthrax song & t-shirt in this movie filled me with such boring old-fart joy. I’ll assume they were used on purpose as they were always big fans of Stephen King and their songs so often referenced his work (such as The Stand in Among The Living & Misery in Misery Loves Company). I bet Anthrax are happy as f*%k that their song Antisocial is in a Stephen King film. And this was possibly my favorite song of theirs at the time, being the socially awkward misfit that I was (am). Anthrax!!! \m/ 🙂

Beauty And The Beast (2017) Review

Beauty And The Beast (2017)

Directed by Bill Condon

Based on Beauty and the Beast by Jeanne-Marie Leprince de Beaumont

Starring: Emma Watson, Dan Stevens, Luke Evans, Kevin Kline, Josh Gad, Ewan McGregor, Stanley Tucci, Audra McDonald, Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Ian McKellen, Emma Thompson

Music by Alan Menken

Plot Synopsis: The same as the 1991 animated Disney film. Just watch the animated version instead if you haven’t already.

My Opinion:

Mehhhh…. I can’t be bothered to write much of a review for this movie. It’s a cash grab – we all know that. I can’t really trash Disney, though. I grew up on Disney films & I’ll always love Disney, even when they sell out. It doesn’t matter – the majority of film studios, actors & actresses, directors, etc etc, all sell out at some point. As long as Disney keep making some original & quality films alongside these pointless remakes & sequels, I can forgive some selling-out. But I’m sorry to say that this remake of Beauty And The Beast is indeed completely pointless.

I actually didn’t mind the live-action Cinderella (which I reviewed HERE). The kid watched that again recently & I still don’t mind it. At least it’s not a straight copy. I also enjoyed Maleficent quite a bit more than this as it felt somewhat original. With Beauty And The Beast copying everything, right down to giving us inferior versions of the fantastic songs from the original, I just don’t see the point. Okay – there were a few extra things added in storywise (and, I can’t remember now – one or maybe two new boring songs) that didn’t really enhance what was already a good & simple fairy tale.

Emma Watson: Wrong for the part. I’ve thought that since it was first announced that she would be Belle. She doesn’t do a horrible job but Hermoine as Belle was always going to be very distracting. Dan Stevens: Nope! Didn’t work. Plus he’s not hot enough (cartoon beast-turned-human was a babe). Kevin Kline: He was okay. Luke Evans: Actually, I guess he was pretty perfect as Gaston. Josh Gad: Not too bad – he was kind of fun but all I can hear is Olaf. Ewan McGregor: He did okay copying the original version of the character but the French accent was just confusing. Well, all the accents in this were confusing (but I suppose the same can be said of the original). Emma Thompson: Perfect casting but YOU CAN NEVER TOP ANGELA LANSBURY, dammit!!!! Chip was still cute, though. Just not as cute as animated Chip. But nothing in this topped the original in any way, so….

Whatever. It’s not a horrible movie. The CGI is decent. No, wait – I suppose the CGI actually quite good but we’re all spoiled these days & expect perfection. If you love the animated film, odds are that you’ll want to watch this at some point but I wouldn’t say you have to rush out to see it. If you haven’t seen the animated film for some reason, please just watch that first. Or instead. I’ll give this an extra half point since my kid seemed to enjoy it. I guess that’s all the really counts, right? 😉

My Rating: 6/10

Red Dawn (2012), People Like Us & We’re The Millers Movie Reviews

Here’s another trio of super short reviews of movies that I watched two years ago & barely remember now! What’s the point, you ask? Well, it’s annoying me that they’re still sitting HERE on my list of Movies Watched In 2014 without reviews attached to them. So, let’s get this over with. One paragraph each! Don’t expect any in-depth analysis. Not that you ever get that from this blog anyway… 😉

IMG_9872

Red Dawn (2012)

Directed by Dan Bradley

Starring: Chris Hemsworth, Josh Peck, Josh Hutcherson, Adrianne Palicki, Isabel Lucas, Connor Cruise, Brad Garrett, Jeffrey Dean Morgan

Plot Synopsis: (via IMDB)
A group of teenagers look to save their town from an invasion of North Korean soldiers.

My Opinion:

Wow. It’s bad enough that so many pointless remakes keep getting made but it’s especially frustrating when they’re complete & utter shit like this Red Dawn remake. Don’t worry – I’m not going to be all “They shouldn’t have touched Red Dawn because the original is a classic!” since that was never an absolute favorite of mine & I’m not all precious about it like I am with a lot of other 80’s movies. But why take a mediocre movie & remake it into something 1,000 times worse?? Oh well! I only watched this because sexy Chris Hemsworth is in it (with his short hair – I prefer him that way). I don’t remember now who lives & who dies but I do remember completely losing interest and not giving a shit about any of the characters. I also remember that I watched this just after getting Netflix & they seemed to have a horrible selection back then (it’s much better now) so I wasted too much time on shit like this & that stupid ATM movie. Speaking of which, that weird little Josh Peck was in that one as well. He had a really bad year for movies between Red Dawn & ATM! Screw Red Dawn. Screw ATM. You know what Josh Peck movie was actually pretty good? Mean Creek. Just watch that instead. Don’t watch this. Not even for short hair Chris Hemsworth. He looks the same in The Cabin In The Woods & that’s much better. Do a double feature of Mean Creek & The Cabin In The Woods! Don’t watch Red Dawn.

My Rating: 3.5/10

People Like Us (2012)

Directed by Alex Kurtzman

Starring: Chris Pine, Elizabeth Banks, Olivia Wilde, Michael Hall D’Addario, Michelle Pfeiffer

Plot Synopsis: (via IMDB)
While settling his recently deceased father’s estate, a salesman discovers he has a sister whom he never knew about, leading both siblings to re-examine their perceptions about family and life choices.

My Opinion:

This was a decent movie – I’m not sure why I never reviewed it. Movies about family relationships don’t always appeal to me but this one, where Chris Pine finds out that he has a half-sister & nephew he never knew about, worked pretty well. I can’t stand Chris Pine but really like Elizabeth Banks plus the boy who played her son (Michael Hall D’Addario) was good so that helped. Oh! And Michelle Pfeiffer was in this too as Pine’s mother – love her. It was partly based on the life of the director, who first met his half-sister at the age of 30, so it probably also helped that the script was based on personal experience. I also liked this little bit of trivia HERE about the music memorabilia of Pine’s musician father in the film belonging to the record producer father of one of the script’s writers:

Much of the music business memorabilia in the “Jerry’s Study” set belongs to Jody Lambert’s father Dennis Lambert, a Songwriter’s Hall of Fame nominee whose hits as writer and/or producer include “Ain’t No Woman (Like The One I’ve Got)”, “Rhinestone Cowboy”, “Baby Come Back” and “Nightshift”.

Anyway, People Like Us isn’t going to change the world but it’s the type of movie that’s perfect to watch on a lazy Sunday afternoon. Good performances from those involved & I liked the story.

My Rating: 6.5/10

We’re The Millers (2013)

Directed by Rawson Marshall Thurber

Starring: Jennifer Aniston, Jason Sudeikis, Emma Roberts, Will Poulter, Nick Offerman, Kathryn Hahn, Molly Quinn, Ed Helms

Plot Synopsis: (via IMDB)
A veteran pot dealer creates a fake family as part of his plan to move a huge shipment of weed into the U.S. from Mexico.

My Opinion:

This movie is really not my type of thing and I don’t know why I watched it. I think I just wanted a simple movie on while I did stuff around the house plus I think I still kind of live in the hope that a modern comedy may actually turn out to be funny. Nope! This is yet another stupid modern “comedy” that failed to make me even crack a smile. Maybe I’m just old & bitter since I’ve liked hardly any comedy films since 1992? Comedy isn’t my favorite genre but I think the fact that so few movies are ever actually funny anymore is to blame for me going off the genre in recent years. Wait! I may have cracked a tiny smile when Will Poulter’s balls were bitten by a spider & they swelled up to an unnatural size while the movie showed us his whole package in gory detail. That was brave of Poulter as I’m sure a lot of people think “spider balls!” anytime they seen him in anything now. Although, I’m pretty sure we were seeing stunt balls. How does one get a job as a stunt penis? Anyway, maybe this movie wasn’t crude enough for me if that’s the only memorable part for me. I mean, I do like the Jackass movies & Bad Grandpa so, what the hell, I can’t figure out my taste in comedy. But I thought We’re The Millers was shit. Except for spider balls being mildly funny…

My Rating: 4/10

Dawn Of The Dead (2004) Review

20140428-084936 pm.jpg

Mike over at Screenkicker has been running the Screenkicker Olympics, a great blogathon in which people have discussed something movie-related from where they grew up or where they now live. It’s been a really fun blogathon & I’ve enjoyed reading all the entries & voting for the best actors & actresses from around the world in a series of polls (I voted for Chris Hemsworth several times but I don’t think it counted all my extra votes!). Thanks for letting me join in on the fun, Mike! 🙂

Anyway, I chose the 2004 flesh-eating zombie film Dawn Of The Dead to represent my home state. You can read my review HERE. 🙂

Oh, and, what the hell? Are there seriously so few other Twilight Zone lovers?! That show was AWESOME! Here are my All-Time Top Ten TV Shows if you missed it.

20140428-085556 pm.jpg

Just Visiting (2001) Guest Review

20140320-015639 am.jpg

This review for the John Hughes Blogathon comes from Josh of JJames Reviews. This is his second review after Mr Mom. Thanks for the reviews, Josh! Now let’s see what he thought of Just Visiting. 🙂

20140320-014559 am.jpg

Just Visiting (2001)

Directed By: Jean-Marie Poire

Written By: John Hughes, Jean Marie Poire and Christian Clavier

Remake of Les Visiteurs (1993)

Starring

Jean Reno
Christina Applegate
Christian Clavier
Matthew Ross
Tara Reid
Bridgitte Wilson
Malcolm McDowell

Running Time: 87 minutes

Plot Synopsis

In the middle ages, a wealthy nobleman, Count Thibault (Jean Reno), is poised to marry the princess Rosalind (Christina Applegate) and live his days happily, but witchcraft forces him to kill Rosalind before their nuptials. In an effort to undo the sorcery and revive his beloved, Thibault and his peasant servant, Andre (Christian Clavier), enlist the help of an aged Wizard (Malcolm McDowell). But the Wizard’s spell goes horribly wrong, and Thibault and Andre find themselves transported to the twenty-first century.

20140320-015056 am.jpg

My Opinion

First, I would like to thank Table 9 Mutant for allowing me to participate in her John Hughes’ Blogathon. Second I woud like to ask her . . . how did you let me pick such a terrible movie? Just . . . Just . . . How? ​

What, precisely, is wrong with this film? The better question: what isn’t wrong with it?

20140320-015154 am.jpg

Let’s get more specific. Time travel is a tricky subject in fiction; it needs to make enough internal sense as to not bog down the project with confused questions. Equally problematically, it needs be simplex enough as to avoid inevitable contradictions once it is defined too much. By keeping time traveling mostly unexplained, Just Visiting manages one-half of this tricky formula, but it stumbles on the other half. As just one example, Thibault has a modern day descendent, despite the fact that he murdered his fiancée and was thereby sentenced to death, all before he conceived a child. How is such a thing possible? How did the man produce children? Just Visiting never bothers to explain.

20140320-015309 am.jpg

20140320-015325 am.jpg

Of course, time travel is a minor issue in comparison to the film’s failed attempts at humor. The best comedians understand that jokes generate laughter once, maybe twice, before growing stale, but such simple concepts escape Writer/Director Jean-Marie Poire and Co-Writers John Hughes and Christian Clavier. Thibault’s mistreatment of Andre is repeatedly played for laughs, which might have been fine, if the Count had occasionally varied his style of abuse, or even his insults. Ditto that for Thibault’s and Andre’s misunderstanding of modern conveniences (toilets, bathtubs, cars, etc). Because the jokes are never more than recycled versions of themselves, Just Visiting’s humor quickly grows tiresome, making this comedy decidedly not funny.

20140320-015425 am.jpg

Given that this film’s humor fails, its attempts at drama better save it. They don’t. Partially because all of the characters, most especially Amber (pictured above), are archetypes with little to no depth. We do not care about these individuals, because they do not have personalities. Instead, they have one or two traits each. For that reason alone, when Julia and Andre stand up for themselves and eventually receive their rewards, we are not moved, a fact that mightn’t be problematic if Just Visiting were actually funny (see above).

John Hughes’ screenplay, in other words, is bad. In fact, between terribly developed characters, repetitive humor and senseless plot devices, it is an utter disaster.

So are most of the performances. Jean Reno never strikes the proper balance between slapstick comedian and straight man, and Christian Clavier’s comic turn is too over the top. Bridgette Wilson fails to do anything memorable with the terrible character she’s given, and Matthew Ross is wooden as the movie’s primary antagonist.

Only Christina Applegate and Malcolm McDowell rise above the material. When playing Julia, Applegate is good enough to almost make us forget that her character is no better developed than anyone else’s. McDowell, too, makes the most of limited screen time, if only because he is suitably exaggerated.

20140320-015516 am.jpg

Conclusion

John Hughes does not redeem himself with Just Visiting. Like most people involved in making this movie, he ought to have been ashamed.

My Rating: 1/10

Kristen Stewart and Nicholas Hoult are Tackling George Orwell’s 1984

20140118-100431 am.jpg
Kind of old news now but I just had to post this so I could say: “What? Are you kidding me?? F&@k off!”.

Now that that’s out of the way, the following and a bit more can be read at this link: Screencrave

[Kristen Stewart] has signed up for a role in a remake of George Orwell’s 1984 that will gear the story towards young romance, and is seemingly called Equals. She’ll be costarring with Nicholas Hoult, recently of Jack the Giant Slayer and Warm Bodies, who is also no stranger to the problems of being young and in love. The film is to be directed by Drake Doremus, best known for Like Crazy.

Whatever.

But in looking for a picture to use in this post (I didn’t want to use Kristen Stewart), I came across this interesting Guardian article where they did a survey asking people if they’ve lied about reading books they never actually read. 1984 is number one. See the top 10 books people claim to read but haven’t here: The Guardian

Really? It’s now many years since I’ve read it but I loved 1984! Also The Catcher In The Rye, To Kill A Mockingbird & Lord Of The Rings. Okay – I fully admit that I’ve not read the rest in the top ten. 🙂

Carrie (2013) Review

20131207-012803 pm.jpg
Carrie (2013)

Directed by Kimberly Peirce

Based on Carrie by Stephen King

Starring:
Chloë Grace Moretz
Judy Greer
Portia Doubleday
Alex Russell
Gabriella Wilde
Julianne Moore

Running time: 99 minutes

Plot Synopsis:
Girl gets period, people piss her off, she becomes psychotic. I have days like that too.

20131207-013946 pm.jpg
My Opinion:

First of all, I’m a huge Stephen King fan. Second of all, I have this confession to make: Carrie is one of the only books of his that I’ve not read. Thirdly, I love the original movie – it just makes it into the list of my Top Ten Horror Movies. Fourthly (Thirdly & fourthly are words, right?), REMAKES PISS ME OFF. So what did I think of yet another completely unnecessary remake?

20131207-014132 pm.jpg
There may be a few SPOILERS here if you’ve actually not seen the original Carrie. If you have, you can probably read this whole review as this remake is pretty much EXACTLY the same movie but with added mobile phones (cell phones to you Americans). I don’t think I’ll be spoiling anything for those who’ve seen the original.

20131207-014206 pm.jpg
The Actresses:

I’ve really liked Chloë Grace Moretz in everything I’ve seen her in so far and she does fine as Carrie. Her Carrie does NOT have the same sort of naive innocence yet underlying crazy THING going on behind the eyes that Sissy Spacek had, though. To be fair, I don’t think Moretz had much to work with here as this is just the 1976 movie with YouTube. It’s very hard to not picture Spacek in this role. I suppose it’s also hard to believe that a teenage girl would be as naive & sheltered in 2013 as one may have been in 1976. They show Carrie looking things up on the Internet on school computers in this one – surely she’d be Googling periods & sex & all that stuff her crazy mother tells her is a sin. Moretz is exactly who I’d have also chosen to play Carrie if I’d made this, though – it’s just hard to fully buy into her character if you know the original so well. Same goes for Julianne Moore – SUCH an obvious casting choice (or a lazy choice if you ask Mista Mutant). Yes, she’s good and does exactly what you expect her to do. But, you know… We’ve already seen this role played perfectly by Piper Laurie. Both the 2013 lead actresses are fine & exactly who I’d have chosen. All the other actresses are also fine (especially Gabriella Wilde as Sue Snell & Judy Greer as the gym teacher). But… What’s the point, really?

20131207-014256 pm.jpg
The Movie:

Believe it or not, I actually enjoyed this movie (I know it hasn’t sounded like it so far). Don’t get me wrong – it’s still a completely pointless remake and will never top the original for me. But I’ve always liked the story. “Girl gets picked on by bitchy high school girls then gets sweet revenge!”. Who doesn’t like that? Especially if they’re a girl who lived through the dreadful high school experience. Is it just me? Maybe I have issues. I mean, one of my all-time favorite movies is Heathers. Okay, yeah – I may have issues.

20131207-014332 pm.jpg
So even though I’ve seen this movie before and knew what would happen, I enjoyed seeing the events unfold once again. And I suppose I should mention Portia Doubleday as that bitch Chris Hargensen. I guess she did a good job as I soooo couldn’t wait for her death scene in this one! I’m not a big fan of horror movies, especially in my old age, and have to admit that I have yet to actually watch the more violent scenes in some of my favorite films. Seriously, I’m a wuss about gore and don’t like violence and think we live in a sad world where people freak out over movies that show a tiny bit of sex but don’t bat an eyelid at their kids playing video games & watching movies with excessive violence and blah blah blah. But, oh man, I wanted to watch the bitch get it in Carrie! And it’s a pretty satisfying end. It’s the only thing I’ll say maybe tops the original. (I have issues with bitchy high school girls. Can you tell?) 😉

20131207-014412 pm.jpg
Bitch!

For the boys, I should point out that Gabriella Wilde is REALLY cute. I did like her as Sue Snell.

20131207-014500 pm.jpg
Cute!

Summary:

This remake is completely pointless. But… it’s fun and I did enjoy it. If you go into it knowing that you’re going to be watching a not-as-good version of the 1976 movie all over again and if you like the story and even if you LOVE the original movie (as long as you don’t totally worship it), I think you’ll have fun with the remake. The casting choices are spot on but it all feels very hollow. All the actresses do a good job but certainly don’t top the performances in the original. All the scenes are done well enough but, again, don’t exactly top anything in the original. The prom scene especially doesn’t manage to have the intensity of the original and was probably the most disappointing re-made scene.

I understand why things get remade. I’ll fully admit that the original Carrie has NOT aged well and is precious to only those my age but teenagers nowadays are “all gonna laugh” at the 1976 film. They may like this remake, though, and I’d recommend the remake to a teenager instead of the original because I know I’d be wasting my time trying to get a current teen to love the oh-so-70s Carrie. So, yeah – I do understand why things keep getting remade. To make money. To bring a whole new audience to something as they’d never watch the original. Remakes still piss me off, though. And I still think this remake is as pointless as all the rest.

But at least we get to see Carrie get her revenge on those high school bitches once again! That made me happy.

My Rating: 6.5/10

20131207-014606 pm.jpg

The Crow Creator Shares Good News About The New Film

20130809-010735 PM.jpg
The Crow creator James O’Barr has the following to say about the new movie, which will star Luke Evans and be directed by F. Javier Gutierrez, according to this link: GeekTyrant

O’Barr talked to Total Film about the director’s plan for the film, and what he thought of Evans’ makeup test:

“It was his idea to go right back to the source material and essentially shoot it shot-for-shot, as in the book, but with a little more backstory for some of the characters.

He wants to be as faithful as possible, even down to all the visual metaphors of trains and horses.

The producers showed me some shots of [Luke Evans] in the make-up and the tragedy really shows on his face, especially his eyes. He has a really commanding screen presence.”

Remake Alert! DAY OF THE DEAD

20130711-110825 PM.jpg
The following is from this link: GeekTyrant

Texas Chainsaw 3D producers Lati Grobman and Christa Campbell have picked up the rights to George Romero‘s zombie film, Day of the Dead, and they are going to remake it.

Yeah. That’s all I need to know. Click the link if you want to read the whole thing.

Piss off! Piss off, Hollywood, with all your damn remakes. Piss OFF. Leave Romero alone. Go make some inferior zombie movie of your own, dammit – can you not come up with an original idea?!?!?

That is all.

Live Action Remake of Studio Ghibli film Kiki’s Delivery Service

20130426-032020 PM.jpg
I posted a link earlier to the live action short that Studio Ghibli have done – Giant God Warrior Appears In Tokyo. But I missed the news that they’re making a live action remake of Kiki’s Delivery Service. Takashi Shimizu (The Grudge) has been confirmed as director. I’m loving the Studio Ghibli stuff lately but I haven’t yet seen Kiki’s Delivery Service. Guess I better watch that soon.

Link to article about the remake and the God Warrior short, including the video of the short: SlashFilm

The Karate Kid (2010)

20121231-014115 AM.jpg

I of course like the original Karate Kid because of the age that I am (not gonna say EXACT age!). 😉 I’m a sucker for all 80s movies but especially any “teen” ones. Although I know that movie is far from perfect, it has some classic scenes (wax on wax off, the chopsticks/fly thing, etc). I get warm fuzzies just thinking about it.

So I was of course pissed off when I found out that they were remaking The Karate Kid. Argh! I’m SO sick of the lack of original ideas for movies these days! I don’t understand the remake thing, especially when the original movie was good enough. I mean, seriously- are they gonna remake Ferris Bueller’s Day Off next? The Breakfast Club? If they touch those I swear I’ll go completely mental.

But now that my little rant is over I have to say this: Damn! The Karate Kid remake was surprisingly good! I don’t think it had any of the “classic moments” that the original had but it was a good solid movie with decent performances and likeable characters and something I’d happily let my kid watch if I had one who was 11 or 12.

Jackie Chan was good, Jaden Smith was good (dammit. I hate Hollywood nepotism! but he’s been really good in movies so far & something about him is quite likeable!), and I thought the relationship between mother and son was good. And the bad kid was an evil little bastard – I wanted to punch him in the face so he obviously did a good job too. And there were some nice funny moments (another chopsticks/fly thing). I liked how they made it different enough from the original for it to feel like a new movie & not a complete waste of time like most remakes. It was great that it was set in China & I actually think it worked well being aimed at a younger audience with the kid being 12 instead of a teenager in high school.

The Karate Kid remake will obviously never live up to the original for me but it’s a good solid family movie in its own right and good family movies are quite rare (i’m talking about ones aimed at the 8-12 range that don’t assume all kids are idiots and that both the kids AND the parents can enjoy – last one like that was Real Steel).

6.5/10