White Settlers (2014) - Undone if you think too deeply

I guess even back in the seventies there was the 'sub-genre' of horror films known as the 'home invasion' type. It was when an innocent couple or family were trapped in their home by some very hostile people, intent on either robbing them, doing them harm, or both.

'White Settlers' certainly fits into that category.  Although I didn't really think the title 'White Settlers' really fitted as it seems to sound like their will be a 'racial element' to this film that's connected with skin colour and there isn't.  A well-to-do English couple buy an old house in the Scottish countryside and, on their very first night, the place gets broken into and they find themselves in a fight for survival.

First of all, the scenery is good - the film does well to showcase the dramatic and rugged landscape which makes up the Scottish countryside.  And the two leads are likeable enough (even if the husband does get a bit annoying at times with his 'jokes').

If you've ever seen a 'home invasion' film then you'll know that's pretty much the premise of every one of them - and if you're looking for something to watch like that, this will fit the bill.  However, it's only when you think a little deeper into what's actually happening (or rather what has happened during the film's runtime) that it doesn't really make much sense.

I may be sounding a little vague, but unless we go into 'spoiler' territory, I can't really say any more.  It certainly in 100% a 'home invasion' movie and as long as you dwell on what's happening right in front of you it should fit the bill.  But if you even dare to slightly think any further about what might happen next for the characters then the whole film just fell apart conceptually for me.

6/10 Should probably keep you awake if Freddy Krueger was haunting your nights

The Toxic Avenger (1984) - Perfectly-crafted awfulness

There are bad films and then there are the films that seem to be 'too bad to be good' and end up being guilty pleasures.  1984's 'The Toxic Avenger' definitely fits into the latter, but in many similar cases, film-makers started off trying to make some sort of masterpiece and just left everyone laughing at them, developing a cult following (ever heard of 'The Room?').  However, I have a real feeling that the people who made 'The Toxic Avenger' knew what they were doing.

I can't believe they have sat down in pre-production and actually thought they would be 're-inventing cinema' with this one.  In short: they knew it was going to be bad and leaned into it - heavily.

It's like the directors looked at every last shot and thought, how can we make it cheesier and more crazy?  It they couldn't get the foreground actors to totally chew up the scenery every step away, pay careful attention to what the background extras are getting up to - everything from having a fight to, er, well having more fights (not to mention just looking generally out of place and odd).

Since 'Iron Man' and the dawn of the 'age of the superhero' we know the formula for films like this.  Average man gets superheroes and fights crime, possibly rescuing a damsel along the way.  For thar part 'The Toxic Avenger' doesn't mix much up, but it just does everything so insanely, you'll certainly remember it once the credits roll.  In fact, what with the Marvel Shared Universe slowly running out of steam, I'd be well up to see the Toxic Avenger head through the multiverse and take over the running of S.H.I.E.L.D from Nick Fury.

It's lewd.  It's crude.  It has excessive gore and is just mad.  If you do think you're suffering from 'superhero fatigue' then you need to watch this.  It will restore your faith in the genre.  Just don't take the kids along to see this one.  This is not a superhero's world you want your children running around in.  Watch it before it gets remade.

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

Arctic Void aka 'Civil Twilight' (2022) - Beautiful, well-scripted and haunting

This one was a real surprise as I had no idea what I was in for when I found this on a streaming service.  It's about an American film crew who are making a documentary aboard a tourist ship while it travels around the coasts of Norway when something majorly spooky occurs.

I kind of want to leave the plot vague as when I watched it I was really interested to see what had happened and how much of a pay-off I'd get from my investment.  I was pleased to say that by the time the credits rolled, most - pertinent - questions were answered and I felt satisfied that I hadn't wasted an hour and a half of my life.

From the beginning I was struck with just how amazing the scenery was.  Kudos to the director who uses the landscape to its fullest in a way that Peter Jackson did with the New Zealand landscape for the 'Lord of the Rings' films.  The vast empty landscapes and deserted towns really add to the overall creepy and hopeless vibe.

And there's the script.  There's only really three main characters and they're all well-written and don't make those typically stupid decisions that people in horror films normally make.  Hopefully, you'll actually care for them and their plight.

I was surprised that the film's ratings were generally pretty low.  I'm guessing that if people didn't like this film it may be because it is quite a slow burner and it's all about building tension rather than with monsters and jump scares.  I guess there are still some questions which remain unanswered and that may annoy some people, but if you're in the mood for a horror/sci-fi movie which relies on mood and atmosphere over blood and guts then you might like this one.  I certainly did.

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that

Blood Vessel (2019) - Not as bad as I thought

There's so many dire movies (especially in the horror genre - which happens to be a favourite of mine) on streaming platforms that when I find one that's even half decent it feels like this is some sort of 'masterpiece' compared to 90% of most streaming platforms' content.

During World War II, a lifeboat of Allied soldiers finds itself stranded at sea, until they come across a large German ship which they board, only to find is deserted.  Naturally, something supernatural has occurred, but it takes cast a little longer to pick up on this.

The cast itself has to be one of the most diverse bunch of stereotypes I've seen in a long time.  Now, despite this probably being seen as a 'negative' the characters are actually quite entertaining and I found myself being able to forgive the typical national traits the writers have bestowed on each protagonist.  Although I swear there was the odd time where the script fell back on 'modern' language instead of working out what kind of insults were appliable from the various nationalities of the era.

One of the survivors is a woman (nurse) who does come across as a little too 'strong-willed' and '2023-esque' than a wartime nurse probably was in those days.  But, when they come across the lone survivor on the boat (a little girl) the two share a few 'Aliens-style' 'Ripley and Newt' moments.

It's quite a slow burner of a film as over two thirds of the runtime is largely taken up with the Allied soldiers wandering round the vessel wondering what happens.  The supernatural threat doesn't really show itself until over fifty minutes into the film's life.  I'm guessing because the movie didn't have much of a budget, the film-makers didn't want too many special effects or heavy make-up shots in order to save money.  The problem is that the 'threat' looks a little goofy and I even found myself laughing when the creatures rubbery ears wobbled when it moved too jerkily.

But, like I say, overall I enjoyed the story and, although it wasn't anything original or something I hadn't seen done a million times before, it killed an hour and a half and I enjoyed some of the choices the story took in order to hammer home the bleakness of the period.

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that

Species III (2004) - Reduced to a 'D-movie'

I'm not saying the original 'Species' movie was a masterpiece.  Anything revolving around an over-sexed alien running round trying to er 'reproduce' with as many men as possible is hardly going to be regarded as 'high art.' But, boy, was it hot fun back in the day.  It had (somehow!) well-established actors among the cast and a creature designed by the same man who had come up with the look of the 'xenomorph' from the iconic 'Alien' franchise.

Then came the sequel.  No, it wasn't as good as the original, but it was okay.  If you had your sights set low enough you could still get some fun out of it.  Now we come to 'part 3.' This one went straight to TV, not even deemed good enough for a mainstream theatrical release.  And I can't say I'm surprised.

If you gauge how good a movie is by how much you want to check your mobile phone during its runtime, then you'll be scrolling through the social media site of your choice for just over ninety minutes.  It really is just dull.

The original star of the first two movies (Natasha Henstridge) returns for the third chapter, but don't get too hopeful - her role is little more than a cameo and you could have probably got a similar looking actress to play the part and no one would have noticed.  We have another rogue scientist trying to splice human and alien DNA and - guess what - it results in an attractive girl or two running round trying to keep her species alive - if you get what I mean.

Only this time the characters don't even come close to being likable and you won't really care about the fate of mankind if these people are the best we have to offer.  Whereas before the alien effects looked genuinely creepy and if they could well have come from another world or dimension, now they're basically a man in a rubber suit jumping about the place while the camera tries to cut away quickly to disguise what they really are.

There's a bit of gore here and there, but it doesn't elevate the film at all.  This is one film that could have once upon a time be considered part of a trash (but fun) B-movie franchise, yet has descended into just something that you probably shouldn't bother wasting your time with.

4/10 You can watch this film while you're doing the ironing (you'll still get the general gist of it)

Clerks III (2022) - The ultimate in 'fan service'

There were few more film-makers in the 90s who influenced me more than Kevin Smith.  After all, he invented the 'shared universe' long before Marvel brought it to the big screen!  I was almost his one man publicity machine back then, getting as many of my friends into his world as I could.  However, slowly his films changed and I think the last one I actually enjoyed was 'Clerks 2' way back in 2006.  Now, when I think of Kevin Smith, I just see him crying over bad 'Star Wars' films on YouTube and the abomination of his 'He-Man' series on Netflix.  The when he rebooted his most famous characters 'Jay and Silent Bob' on the big screen I don't think I laughed once during its runtime.

What I'm saying is that my hopes were not high when I sat down to watch 'Clerks III.' I don't remember it even being released in the cinemas (but then that could have been something to do with the global pandemic).  So I finally decided to watch it on a streaming service.  And - eventually - I was glad I did.

I kind of starts off a bit on shaky ground.  We're back at the Quickstop shop and lifelong buddies Dante and Randal are embarking on yet another day in the life of an employee there.  I'm fine with regurgitating the setting, but the jokes seemed to take a while to get going and, when they did, I just felt they'd lost their realistic edge (I was on the brink of turning it off when a doctor in a hospital arrived to the ward wearing a Halloween witch's costume.  But I stuck with it.

And I was rewarded for doing so, as I ended up getting a film that wasn't just laugh out loud funny, but also quite heart felt in more than one place.  The story centres on the two main characters deciding to chronicle their lives on film, i.e. making a film of the first film (how meta!).  And that was great - for me.  But then I've seen - and loved - every film in the 'Viewaskewniverse' (with the exception of the Jay and Silent Bob reboot).  So I was well catered for, picking up on every sly wink and nod to camera and the relating back to past exploits and stories.

If this film truly has a 'downside' is that, if I pictured myself as watching it out of the blue with no knowledge regarding what has come before, I simply wouldn't have 'got' anything.  I wouldn't have a clue why the things that were happening were funny or tragic (or both).

So, basically, if you're a fan of Smith's early work then this is the ideal conclusion to the 'world' he's created.  However, if you have no idea of anything that's come before this I would probably recommend starting with the original 'Clerks' film - don't worry, it still holds up (and the sequel is pretty good, too). 

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that

Dead Again (2021) - Sean of the Dead, it isn't

I'm guessing the film-makers behind 'Dead Again' must be massive fans of the Simon Pegg 'Cornetto Trilogy' as it's effectively a cross between 'Hot Fuzz' and, of course, 'Sean of the Dead.' Sadly, it doesn't even come close to either.  It starts off really serious and you think you're going to be in for some world-ending, apocalyptic epic adventure.  You get quite the opposite.

A pair of police officers (who are the typical 'funny man' and 'straight man' or discount versions of Nick Frost and Simon Pegg) patrol a quiet little English country town where nothing out of the ordinary ever happens.  Naturally, the dead start to rise and cause all kinds of havoc, well, nearly.

Some films don't have a budget that matches their concept, yet can be forgiven because they have other qualities such as a good script which makes up for it.  Here, it doesn't have either and when it's not copying lines from 'The Thing' it's adhering to every horror cliche ever.  The two policemen are by far the best actors - the others aren't really up to much, but then the script is so clunky the poor actors aren't really given much to work with.  There aren't any actors you'll probably recognise (or certainly none that I'd seen in anything else!).  Plus the scenes just ramble on and on - whether they're supposed to be 'character building' or 'dramatic' (such as the longest and most boring chase ever through an empty house where the camera simply follows the victim for longer than you could ever wish for).

Also, the direction is weird with strange red filters (with a firework/sparkler at the top) on outside shots and then when they're not using cheap Instagram filters it's like the camera is over-exposed and really bright and overly vibrant.  Again, this all adds to the 'cheap factor' and when there are kills, don't expect any good gore.  They can't afford that.  Just the odd CGI splatter of blood for head shots.

Overall, it feels like a student film - and not a very good one.  It is short.  That's about the best thing I can say about it.

5/10 a hard trek, a bit like unicycling to Mordor and back

Ibiza Undead aka 'Zombie Spring Breakers' (2016) - Just watch 'Sean of the Dead'

I know that 'Sean of the Dead' was released well over ten years before this entry into the - by 2016 - slowly rotting corpse of a genre which all things undead had become by then.  If it was released a decade earlier 'Ibiza Undead' may have stood more of a chance for being - at least a little bit - original, but there are simply a hundred better zombie TV shows and movies by this stage.

A group of teens head to Ibiza (while a zombie outbreak is well underway) - this is about the most interesting act of the story as it seems that humanity considers flesh-eating ghouls as simply a minor inconvenience, rather than a threat to their species and the bringers of the apocalypse.  There are even pamphlets explaining the 'dos' and 'don'ts' of how to deal with the monsters - to which some of the protagonists are so unbothered that they don't even read them!

Anyway, the two main leads feel like carbon copies of James Corden and his mate's characters from 'Lesbian Vampire Killers.' I've only seen that film the once so I simply remember Corden's performance of being kind of loud-mouthed, over s3xual and swearing a lot.  Well, if you don't like Corden and his style in general, you'll hate the dime store version of his character in 'Ibiza Undead.' He's really cringe and hard to watch - even towards the end when the writers try to make us feel sorry for him he messes his 'redemption arc' up and reverts back to his awful type.

Most of the characters are basically unlikable, but at least 'Peep Show's' Matt King puts in a performance that shows he's head and shoulders above the rest.  The film doesn't really have the budget for much gore (besides a semi-reasonable amputation about three quarters the way through the film) and it certainly doesn't have the talent from the writers.

If it does have a plus point is that it looks quite pretty with plenty of bright and neon colours, giving off the 'clubby' vibe that Ibiza is famous for (not that I've been there, so I'm just guessing!) and there are a few 'screen wipes' which reminded me of the way they changed scenes in 'Star Wars' which feel a little pointless here.

By the end, you won't really care about any of the protagonists and having them suddenly develop into super zombie bada$$ killers in the final scene feels totally out of place and character and the semi rip-off of the end of the 2004 'Dawn of the Dead' end scene doesn't add a fraction of the emotional weight it did in Zack Snyder's version.  In fact, you can watch that, 'Sean of the Dead' or pretty much any other zombie film or TV show and be more entertained or amused than this one.

5/10 a hard trek, a bit like unicycling to Mordor and back

Dark Harvest (2023) No idea where this was heading

I've got a feeling that this review is going to be pretty short.  I don't really have much to say about 2023's 'Dark Harvest.' It's set in a small American town where some sort of beastie is terrorising the local population, in particular a class of teenage boys who, decide one day to fight back.

That doesn't sound so bad for a generic B-list horror movie.  But it's just that nothing really happens throughout the film.  Yes, the beastie occasionally pops out and kills someone and he's not so bad in terms of practical effects.  However, this is few and far between and most of the film is just teenage boys (who you won't really like that much) arguing with each other.

Parts of the film are shot at night.  Nothing wrong with that - if the film-makers could actually light the sets properly and many a night scene comes across like it's been set in pure darkness.

Worse still, by the halfway mark of the film, I had no real idea what the hell was going on.  I hope it's not just that I'm losing braincells more and more every day, so hopefully that's just a personal problem.

If you can stick with it there's a bit more carnage in the final act, but is it really enough to warrant sitting through the whole thing just to get to a sub-par finale?

4/10 You can watch this film while you're doing the ironing (you'll still get the general gist of it)

Love Hurts (aka 'Most Horrible Things' 2022) - Guess you'll either love or 'hurt' it!

I watched 2022's 'Most Horrible Things' (apparently also known as 'Love Hurts' which is probably a better title on reflection) on a streaming service and, as many people probably feel, streaming services do just tend to fill up their channel with 'content' rather than considering the merits of what they're putting out.  For that reason, many of the horror films I watch on their are pretty dire.  Perhaps that was a good thing when I sat down to watch it, as my expectations were pretty low.

And it is certainly low budget.  Set over the course of a night where six strangers are invited to dinner at the promise of $10,000 each for their stay by the mysterious owner.  Naturally, things don't go to plan and the bodycount starts to rise as the night progresses.

But, just because there's no budget or even big name actors, doesn't mean it's not worth considering.  The characters, being basically only eight of them, all get a chance to be in the spotlight and there are some nice 'reveals' about some of them that I didn't see coming.

All the actors play their parts well (my personal favourites were the mansion's host/owner and his loyal butler!) and I kind of knew that all would not be what it first seemed and that there were probably going to be a few twists and turns as the story unfolded.  I was right in that there are a few 'left turns' the story takes, but I'm notoriously bad at predicting these sorts of things, so maybe it's just me when I say that I never saw any of them coming.

Naturally, there are no huge alien invasions or high-speed car chases, so if you choose to watch this you're going to need to be in the mood for a slow burner.  I've read a few other reviews and it seems that opinion is split with other viewers either loving or hating it.  Personally, I wouldn't say it's a classic that will stand the test of time, but it's definitely worth watching if you're in the mood for this sort of film and you get the chance to see it as part of your streaming package.

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that

The Beaster Bunny (2014) - Not worth your time

You may like B-movies.  You may like cheesy 'so-bad-they're-good' movies and you may like horror movies.  It doesn't matter.  It won't give you back the time you've wasted watching this.  I know it doesn't take itself seriously and so maybe I'm being too harsh, but this film is just poor.

I guess I have to start with the (least) 'special' effects I've ever seen - and I've seen some pretty bad ones.  The monster-rabbit is so badly animated it can't actually run (oh, and to me it looked more like a rat than a rabbit - seriously - it's ears are too small!).  Instead, characters run away from it and they we cut to scenes of them dead because the CGI creature can't afford to actually be seen killing them.

The acting is just awful.  And there's deliberate nudity.  I only really mention the two together because I'm guessing the film-makers hired actresses better known for their 'adult' roles in which to wave their hands in the air while topless before we see their severed remains.

Any characters that aren't automatically killed are totally unlikable and special mention to the mayor of the town who is the most annoying character I've seen in a while.  I practically only stuck with the film because I wanted to see him killed.

You shouldn't watch this.  There's so much better out there in the cheesy, laughable horror genre.  It's like it's been written by two sets of writers as there is the odd scene that's actually quite well written (like the one in a cafe between a father and daughter).

And what's with the random 'Aliens' line thrown in there?

2/10 Scuzzier than the leftover goo from a Queen alien's egg sack

Summer Camp (2015) - Shake it, baby!

Wow, I've watched bad films before and not enjoyed them because of things like story, acting, plot etc, but 'Summer Camp' gave me a new reason to really consider turning it off from any time after the twenty minute mark.

I'm a general fan of horror and/or B-movies, so I've watched (and enjoyed) a tonne of cliched films where a handful of teenagers get stalked by - insert monster or serial killer of your choice here - and liked them for what they were.  So when the summary of this movie was basically, four camp councillors get infected with a deadly disease while in a Spanish summer camp, I was pretty sure I'd be getting some form of zombie outbreak film.

And I got basically just that - only with two major differences/problems.  The first was that the film was just too damn dark to ever see what was going on.  Seriously, I actually tried adjusting my TV's contrast and brightness in the hope of actually working out what was going on.  The second - and even worse - problem was that the camera constantly shakes whenever something - supposedly scary - happens.  This, combined with the fact that the film is shot in near darkness means I couldn't tell what was happening at any time.

One example was two people driving in a car.  One attacks the other.  The car crashes.  I assumed both were still in the vehicle, but it turned out one had got out (or jumped out?) and I hadn't been able to see this happen on screen.

In short, this film just doesn't work because you need night vision goggles to even stand a chance of getting anything out of it.  I don't know how you overcome the 'shaky-cam' - maybe just be used to being on a ship on choppy water?  There are a million better zombie/infection stories out there that you can actually see what's going on.

4/10 You can watch this film while you're doing the ironing (you'll still get the general gist of it)

The Lair of the White Worm (1988) - Has to be seen to be believed

For a horror fan it's hard to believe that I've only just seen this film in 2023.  It's one film that I actually find hard to describe.  I guess it's definitely a horror movie, but is it scary?  Not really.  So is it a farce, or a comedy?  No, definitely not.  It's somewhere in the middle, never completely going full 'self aware,' but at the same time definitely not as serious as other classic tales from the genre.

It's about a pair of archaeologists who discover evidence in the British countryside of a giant worm that's the basis from some local folklore.  The two men are played by Hugh Grant (who hasn't really changed much!) and Peter Capaldi (who it took me a while to actually recognise as he's one of those actors who somehow you find it hard to picture as ever being 'young!'). 

Their discovery leads them to get to know a particularly curious member of the gentry, one Lady Sylvia Marsh (Amanda Donohoe).  Naturally, it turns out that she knows more than a little about the fable of the 'white worm.'

It may sound like a fairly generic horror movie, but I can assure you that the way it's shot and the vivid and unsettling imagery will stick in your head long after the credits have rolled.  There are parts that are trippy and just plain weird and sometimes you won't know whether to be scared, disgusted or simply laugh out loud.

It's sort of like an old British Hammer horror film, but with a higher budget and filmed while high on certain substances.  Grant and Capaldi are good in the leading roles, but it's the scenery-chewing Donohoe that steals every moment she's on screen.

If you're a fan in general of quirky horror films then you really should see it the way it was meant to be before some Hollywood producer decides to remake it and it becomes a shadow of its former self. 

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that

The Resort (2021) - So many cliches

I'm not saying that I'm the greatest screenwriter ever (my screenwriting credits amount to a grand total of NO films!), but I have been watching horror films since the seventies.  I like to think this at least gives me an idea of what to expect when watching a horror/slasher film. 'Scream' was released back in 1997 and poked fun at all the cliches and silliness associated with the genre so I find it hard to believe a film like this can be made in 2021.

It's not a terrible film, it's just filled with so many elements that anyone who's ever watched a horror film will roll their eyes at what happens here.  It's about four friends (their ages are never revealed here, but if they're actually supposed to be teenagers then they look at least thirty!) who visit a remote island off Hawaii in the hope of getting some photographs of a deserted resort that's supposed to be haunted.

Nothing wrong with the premise, but no sooner have we been introduced to our quartet do we get a flashback of the main girl in a hospital bed after the visit to the island.  There, she tells a detective that all her friends were killed, so that kind of removes all tension with the other three as to whether they'll live or not.

The four main characters aren't that memorable; besides the 'young' woman who's the lead, you have a generic blonde as her friend, plus a guy who looks like Thor when he was fat, plus another man who only talks about s3x.  Seriously, that's his whole 'character' - he just talks constantly about s3x.  

The film isn't long - one hour and fifteen minutes - which is probably a bonus, but I stuck with it until the final act.  I've seen a fair few horror films that were pretty generic all the way through, but at least had a decent finale.  Not here.  The evil spirit looks like a cheaper version of the girl from 'The Ring,' the audio seems to get muffled and you can't really hear what people are saying and the characters start running around like headless chickens.

Like I say, it's not the worst film I've ever seen, but there are a million of the same genre that are much better and without the numerous cliches which make it seem like it's been written by someone who's never seen a horror film in their life.

5/10 a hard trek, a bit like unicycling to Mordor and back

Captive (2023) - Generic, but fun

There are some film that I just can't work out.  Sometimes they included all the elements of a genre that I should like - and yet I end up hating the finished product.  Other times (like now) this one has a lot of negatives, yet I came away feeling like I hadn't wasted an hour and a half of my life.

I'm not sure whether it's a 'spoiler' to talk about the promotional front cover/poster, as it's kind of in your face already whenever you see the cover art of image on a streaming service.  It does kind of give the game away as to what the film's about.  The blurb reads something like 'a group of stoners break into a house to get high, but get more than they bargained for.' That could leave you wondering what they come up against and what the threat is they face.  But if you've seen the poster then you'll have immediately seen the fangs, indicating that this is a vampire movie.

It's sort of like an extended episode of 'Buffy' but aimed more at adults.  The teenagers get stalked in one large house while the plot if peppered with some vague 'love story' elements that any good (or terrible!) teen drama is littered with.

The dialogue is average at best.  The acting is passable, but, to be fair, the actors aren't given a lot to work with!  The plot is kind of predictable and you'll know who's going to get their pretty little teenage throat chomped on and any bloodsplatter is blatantly computer-generated.

In other words... this film has more than its fair share of faults.  And I actually quite enjoyed it.  Yes, it's no masterpiece and I may not remember it this time next year, but it was serviceable enough for what it was.  I was clearly in the mood for something that wasn't particularly taxing and possibly in a very forgiving mood.  There's certainly a hundred better vampire movies and TV shows out there, but there are certainly some worse ones, too - at least the vamps didn't even come close to 'sparkling' in sunlight here.  

6/10 Should probably keep you awake if Freddy Krueger was haunting your nights

Hardware (1990) - I still don't get it

I'm a huge 'Terminator' fan and I remember seeing this video in the store back in the early nineties.  The front cover features - what might well as be - the skull of a T-800's endoskeleton and that was it, I handed over my money and took the movie home for the weekend.

I only watched about half of it.

Weirdly, the basic premise has always stuck by me over the years.  It's set in another post apocalyptic wasteland of America, but this time it's more sandy than filled with lasers and killer cyborgs.  A drifter finds what looks like the basic torso and head of a robot (yes, again, think a T-800 endoskeleton) and brings it back to what's left of civilisation.  There, a space marine who's home for shore leave buys it as a present for his artist-girlfriend.  

However, he probably should have just stuck with flowers as the robot starts rebuilding itself until it's a full-size metal monster with two pokey little needles on one hand that he quite likes injecting people with (his favoured method of despatching victims).

This basically is how the second half of the film transpires... the machine stalks the lead girl in her flat.  Yes, just the flat.  She gets away.  Rinse and repeat.  Now, if you asked the question: how does a machine built to kill humans manage to keep losing the only target in a pretty small hunting ground?  Then you'll have asked the question that made me turn it off all those years ago. 

However, it's possibly just me.  I watch a lot of B-movies and YouTube top ten videos where we hear about all these 'cult classics.' And, sure enough, 'Hardware' is among them.

So I gave it a watch all the way through this time.  Okay, so the pace does pick up in the final act, but it's still all just set in the one location.  I guess the older me can now pick up on how good the set design was and overall world-building looked.  It's just all set in a flat.  I always figured is something similar happened to me I could always just walk out of my house and just run off before I got poked with the robot's two needles.

A lot of people like it, so maybe check some high-rated reviews out before you decide to invest an hour and a half of your life into watching this.

4/10 You can watch this film while you're doing the ironing (you'll still get the general gist of it)

Primal (2016) aka ‘Well’ - The jury's still out on this one

The credits have finally rolled and I can't make my mind up about whether I liked 'Well' or not.  I must confess that I have been getting more than a little tired about the 'formula' where hero gets powers and saves the world after defeating a villain with similar superpowers.

Lately, I've been crying out for a story have isn't a remake of something - meaning I know where it's going to go because I read the comic back in the nineties.  And this is it.  I didn't know what to expect and the fact that it was in among the 'horror' films, I thought there might even be an evil beastie hunting the protagnonists, but the story featured nothing like that.

It's about a mother who drops her deadbeat adult son off at his father's gas station in the middle of Eastern Europe,  The son hasn't seen his dad since he was little and he gets hardly any time to get to know him because gangsters and prostitutes soon gate crash and demand him hand over something he'd clearly stolen from them.

So there's plenty of tension between the various parties, as the van the thugs arrive in breaks down there and they have to stay at the gas station for a few nights.

Ultimately, what you have here is the simple definition of a 'slow burn,' Boy, is it slow.  Not to say that things are always hard to see, or even that nothing happens.  People come and go and as the scenes go by we do get a better idea as to what our characters are all about.  But you may be crying out for some sort of action.  I hate to disappoint, but you don't get any.  There are no stylised action scenes, hordes of computer-generated monsters or high octane car chases in sports cars.  There's a bit of gun play near the end if you've stuck it out that long, but that's about all you'll get.

The violence and decisions the characters make are actually quite toned down and sensible.  No one tales a hundred punches and keeps fighting.  Once someone is hurt, they're hurt and better pray no one goes for them white they're weak.

If you're looking for anything vaguely fast-paced, or the snappy banter of a Guy Ritchie/Tarrantino movie then you won't find what you're looking for here.  But if you're ready for something a lot more slow paced and just a little more thoughtful, this could be worth a watch.

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that

Sea Beast aka ‘Troglodyte’ (2008) – It gets better!

I didn’t expect an awful lot from a film entitled ‘Sea Beast,’ but I do confess to enjoying a good monster-munching B-movie and I thought this one might fit the bill.  However, at about the twenty minute mark I was seriously considering turning it off – I know it’s hardly a ‘mega budget’ blockbuster type film, but I thought the special effects might be a little better than when you first see the titular creatures.  In short… have you seen a Playstation ONE cut scene?  If so, then that’s kind of what the beast looked like.

However, I persevered and, believe it or not, I was glad I did.  Either my eyes got used to just how badly designed/animated the monsters were, or the film-makers used the worst take on the initial sighting of the antagonists, as the creatures seemed to look a little less CGI-ed onto the film.

No, ‘Sea Beast’ still wasn’t an Oscar-worthy affair.  You won’t really recall any of the cast once the credits have rolled.  I can’t even remember any of their names.  They’re there purely to die – and die they promptly do.  You’ll probably guess at least a handful of those who are destined to survive, but that’s not to say their characters are ever defined any deeper than ‘the guy with long hair’ or ‘the main girl.’

Perhaps what makes the monsters a little better is that the film-makes use the tried and tested trick (that they’ve obviously gleamed from the ever awesome ‘Predator’) of making the monsters sort of invisible, which cuts down the need for special effects.  In fact, there is some dialogue here and there that does sort of sound like it was almost copied and pasted from Arnie’s jungle outing against a certain head-hunting alien.

Ultimately, ‘Sea Beast’ is what I had thought it would be – an hour and a half of utter trash, purely designed to fill a small gap in my life where I had nothing better to watch and fancied something that I didn’t have to think about.  It’s no masterpiece and there are a million better movies (did I mention the 1987 film ‘Predator?’) but this one is watchable enough to only make me want to check my phone every few minutes during its runtime.

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that

Free Guy (2021) – A mash-up that works

Okay, so take ‘The Truman Show,’ sprinkle in some ‘Groundhog Day,’ then add a bit of ‘Ready Player One’ and ‘The Matrix.’ Finally, stick Ryan Reynold’s face on it and let him go to work with his charmingly laid back kind of humour and you have ‘Free Guy’ – a film that probably shouldn’t work quite as well as it does.

Maybe I’m overthinking it, but I’d almost like to see the film done differently.  Normally, I would say that admitting that Ryan Reynolds’ character (‘Guy’) is an ‘NPC’ (or ‘non playable character’) in a state of the art open-world video game may be classed as a ‘spoiler.’ However, I think I can get away with mentioning that because the film pretty much tells you this within a few minutes, plus this point was heavily emphasised in the marketing.

But, like I say, I kind of wish they’d have kept it more of a secret for longer.  I think there would have been mileage in letting Guy wander around this crazy world while we – the audience – wonder just what the hell is going on.  I guess if the film-makers did this then the movie would probably have been a ten part series on Netflix.

Instead, it’s all thrown at us pretty quickly as to what’s going on.  Guy is one of the millions of NPCs who are there just to make the game zone (or ‘Free City’) appear like a real world to the players in the game.  Yet, one day he develops a consciousness and therefore a desire to be more than just cannon fodder for trigger happy teens all over the world.

I suppose what elevates this to more than many similar stories is it’s the first (to my knowledge) to use a computer game world to let someone come ‘alive’ in (okay, so ‘Wreck-It Ralph’ was kind of in the same ball park, but that was more of a kids’ movie). ‘Free Guy’ spreads itself over so many genres it’s hard to pinpoint exactly what it is.  I guess you could also call it a sci-fi, comedy, love story, but it’s the overriding sense of social satire that anyone who has a relatively good knowledge of videogames will appreciate. 

And did I mention it has Ryan Reynolds in it?  He’s almost always worth the price of a cinema ticket so fans of his will get what they came for, not to mention general film buffs and pop culture enthusiasts who can enjoy the many references to other IPs (yes, ‘Deadpool’ is obviously in there).

Overall, I think most people who have, or know about, open world computer games should enjoy this one.  Although, I have a weird image of sitting my mum down to watch this and having almost every joke and reference fly over her head, leaving her with a nonplussed look on her face.  Guess it’s probably for the ‘gamer generation’ primarily.

8/10 The Force is definitely strong with this one

 Like Dogs – Different enough to make it worthwhile

I didn’t really know what to expect when I saw down to watch ‘Like Dogs,’ – the blurb didn’t really give much away, other than two people had been captured and were being treated like – you guessed it – canines.  And that’s actually a pretty good summary.

When the film opens we meet the protagonist – a woman who has been abducted against her will, chained to a wall in a seemingly nondescript building and is being fed some sort of dubious meat-stuff in a bowl off the floor.  Naturally, she’s not too pleased with her masked captors and does her best to escape – but, seeing as she’s chained to a wall, she obviously doesn’t get very far.  Soon she realises she’s not alone in there, as there’s also a man in an equally degrading position a few bays down from her.  They strike up a bond and, more importantly, ideas on how to break free.

I’ll leave it there in terms of plot as there are some elements that you might not see coming (I didn’t, but then I’m notoriously bad at predicting ‘twists!’).  I expected what was probably going to be ‘torture p0rn’ and, I guess there are some elements, but there’s also a lot more to the mystery than first meets the eye.

As it got into the final act the dynamics of the movie shifted a bit over the way it appeared to be heading and, for a moment, I thought it was going to do a 180 degrees and effectively undo all the dark undertones that had been building.  However, I was pleasantly surprised when this was merely an attempt to lull the audience into thinking it may actually be going in a different direction, before making sure it course-corrected and stuck true to the elements it was building on.

‘Like Dogs’ certainly won’t be for everyone.  There’s no special effects, epic battles, big name stars or flashy direction, but what is there instead is a disturbingly dark tale of an insight into the deranged human mind.  Few films get much darker than this, but if you’re in the mood, this one might fit the bill.

7/10 if I woke up on Groundhog Day and had to watch this again, I could live with that