Wednesday, 26 March 2025

Scared to Death (1980) - Yeah, it's a movie

First of all, I know it's petty - but the title.  We all know you shouldn't judge a book by its cover, so you shouldn't base your opinion on a film's title.  But 'Scared to Death' sounds more like some psychological horror or slasher film.  It's not.  It's a 'monster munching' movie, more akin to a (low budget!) 'Alien' rip-off.

Anyway, there's a monster rampaging round an American city, murdering hapless extras and the police are baffled until a local private detective teams up with the obligatory love interest to save the day.

There's not an awful lot to say about the film.  As I mentioned, it's set on Earth, therefore there are no outstanding science fiction sets to speak of.  The acting and dialogue is passable at best and there's really nothing you haven't seen before if you're a fan of the genre.

I will mention I actually quite liked the creature itself.  It reminded me of something out of the mind of HR Giger (who actually designed the xenomorph from 'Alien'), but it's ruined by budget constrains preventing it from being particularly well animated in its facial movements, making it end up like just a man in a rubber suit from a 70s 'Dr Who.'

If you really want to watch yet another 'monster movie' then there are definitely worse.  It's not offensively bad, but it's not great either, relying on long scenes of victims quietly walking around deserted places before ultimately meeting their doom.  Even fast forwarding them until the kill itself made the film drag.  Just watch 'Alien' or 'Species.'

Oh, and there's a bit which made me laugh and think they ripped off 'The Terminator.' Then I realised this film was made four years before that classic.  So, er, fair play to 'Scared to Death' for beating James Cameron to the punch on that one!

4/10

Tuesday, 18 March 2025

Seed People (1992) - Discount Bodysnatchers

Have you ever seen that old black and white 'Invasion of the Bodysnatchers' film?  That was a classic.  Or did you watch the seventies remake?  That was cool, too.  Or, perhaps you've seen one of the numerous clones where aliens start replacing humans with identical copies?   Well... if you've only seen one of those, I'm going to hazard a guess that any of them was better than 1992's 'Seed People.'

I've kind of already summed up what little plot there is.  Aliens, in pod form, come to Earth and start replacing the humans in a small backwater American town with emotionless clones.  

The story is kind of told in retrospect as the protagonist is hospitalised right at the beginning and recounting the events of the film to a Government official.  Besides kind of giving away much of the ending right at the start, it kind of breaks the tension when it keeps returning to the 'present' at various times during the story.

There's really not much else to say.  It has a real 'made for TV' feel - if you like this kind of science fiction then watch either the original 'Bodysnatchers' film or the seventies remake.  In fact... even that one with Nicole Kidman and Daniel Craig is more worth your time than this.  

I have to confess in actually quite liking the 'monster design,' but then I grew up with seventies and eighties 'Dr Who' so I have a soft spot for silly rubbery monsters that you can practically see the seams in the costume!  Although it's hard to believe that 'special' effects can look this decidedly UNspecial a year after 'Terminator 2' with its genre-changing effects came out.

5/10

Tuesday, 11 March 2025

Mickey 17 (2025) - Good fun, despite its flaws

I didn't know that much about 'Mickey 17' and only really saw it because the other half has a thing for Robert Pattinson.  I've mainly only seen him in the 'Twilight' franchise, but, every other time he's popped up in something I've watched, I have to admit that he's shed his 'twinkly' former self and is actually quite a good actor.

Anyway, here we find him in a bit of a dystopian future where mankind have the option to board giant spaceships bound for far away planets where they can colonise.  And, because poor ol' Mickey doesn't have much in the way of 'skills' required for such a mission, he signs up to be an 'expendable.' This means he's the one sent on all the most deadly missions and if (or should I say when?) he dies, they simply reprint a copy of him the next day - they can do that, by the way.

Personally, I really enjoyed 'Mickey 17' as it's actually a lot funnier than I thought it would be (at first I thought it might be a horror, or at least a 'Starship Troopers-esque' action sci-fi film.  Robert Pattinson is easily the main draw and elevates the film to be more than it otherwise might as well have been.  His on screen presence carries the 'slower' portions of the story.  Which brings me on to pacing. 'Mickey 17' - like so many modern films - could probably lose about twenty minutes of their overall runtime and be all the better for it.  The movie does drag in a few places, but the major flaw is the film's villains.  Mark Ruffalo and Toni Collette are both good actors, but they're so over-the-top and comic they feel like they belong in a kids' movie.  Plus, I'm not really into politics and would rather my entertainment also didn't remind me of all the worst things in the real world, but even I picked up on the - not particularly subtle - similarities to a certain famous/infamous politician.

But, luckily, I found the film was quirky and fun enough to ignore the flaws and I could occasionally tune out when it dragged a bit.  Overall, a nice little film - probably not a classic, but definitely worth a watch (especially when it comes to streaming if you're unsure as to whether you want to pay full price at the cinema).

8/10

Saturday, 8 March 2025

Robowar (1988) - Should Predator sue?

Okay, I get that there are few original stories these days and most films we see are 'inspired' by previous films.  Some even go as far as to be called 'rip-offs' and yet even those probably have more originality than 'Robowar.' Now, 'Predator' was a massive success a year before this was released in 1988 and it still holds up to this day.  After it hit the big screen there was a rise in 'monster movies' - many paying homage to Schwarzenegger's classic. 'Robowar' is something else.

Within the first few minutes I thought to myself, 'Huh, reminds me a bit of Predator.' Soon I realised the film-makers have borrowed the entire set-up of 'Predator.' Half an hour in the scenes from 'Predator' have been recreated (only with a much smaller budget) and by the halfway mark it was almost directly lifting dialogue.

It was about then that I gave up.  If the film was more 'self knowing' and played for laughs (the way 'Hot Shots' spoofed 'Top Gun' and 'Scary Movie' imitated 'Scream') then this might have worked, but it was made as if it should be taken seriously.

I would say that the studio behind 'Predator' should sue for blatantly ripping them off, only I doubt 'Robowar' made more than a few dollars at the Box Office or on DVD, so there really isn't any point.

Maybe watch it for the Dolph Lundgren lookalike who wears a crop top.  I couldn't take him seriously after that.

2/10

Thursday, 6 March 2025

Grave Secrets (1989) - What a slog

Holy moly, was this hard to get through.  I have to confess to watching it in two parts and, by the time I'd got round to watching the second half, I'd pretty much forgotten what had gone on before.  I decided to start again from the beginning until I realised that nothing much of any interest had happened and I could just skip back to the midway point where I'd originally left off.

It feels like one of those 'made-for-TV' movies based off a Stephen King story that seemed to be very popular in the eighties.  Those weren't very good - and yet they were head and shoulders over this offering.  It's about a woman who's troubled by a ghost and, seeing as the 'Ghostbusters' were obviously way too busy to help out, she enlists the help of a college professor with an interest in the paranormal.

And, er, that's about it for the most part.  Almost nothing happens until about ten minutes before the end.  The characters are ugly (meow!) and they do quite dumb things.  It looks like the film-makers put everything into one make-up scene a few almost passable special effects right at the end.  But that was way too little too late to make this worth sitting through.

3/10

Monday, 3 March 2025

The Monkey (2025) - Great fun!

Stephen King's book adaptations have always been a bit of a 'hit or miss' affair (and I've watched pretty much all of them since the eighties!), but, within the first five minutes of 'The Monkey' I could tell this was going to be up there with the best of them.

The premise is simple - there's a possessed child's toy (oh, wait, I probably shouldn't refer to it as a 'toy' - it really doesn't like that!) shaped like a monkey and, if you dare wind it up, someone will end up the worse for wears - fatally.

Now, King being the horror author he's mainly known for one of your first questions may be, 'Is it scary?' My answer would be a definite 'no.' It's too much of a black comedy/horror to really be that sinister.  There is some nice gore here and there which may make your stomach turn slightly, but the film is mainly played for laughs and delights in making fun of horror tropes.

I don't really want to say too much about the film.  I heard various online film reviewers giving it 'middling' reviews, so I wasn't expecting that much.  However, I'd say it's up there with the best King movie adaptations - if you have tongue firmly in your cheek then this is definitely a great time and I'm going to be tracking it down when it comes out on DVD.

8/10

Saturday, 1 March 2025

Army of One (2020) - Should have been a parody

There's nothing wrong with a good 'revenge movie.' They've been around longer than I have and I'm guessing one of the first that brought the genre into the mainstream was 'Death Wish' in the seventies.  There, a man lost his family to thugs and - you guessed it - took revenge (the fatal kind).

Here we have a man and a woman fall foul of some local hillbillies in the middle of nowhere.  Let's just say the husband doesn't last long and his wife is left for dead - big mistake.  For what the locals don't realise is that she's a trained soldier who has the skills to make their lives a lot shorter.

Now, I know that to enjoy most movies you have to 'suspend your disbelief.' No one really believes aliens exist or superheroes are really flying about the place.  For reasons that I guess are my own, I can enjoy superheroes and aliens without any bother, but the sight of a very slim young woman maiming her way through a small army of giant bodybuilders is a step too far.

The bad guys - well, they're just bad.  You've never seen a more one-dimensional bunch of nondescript flesh-bags than this lot.  If you've killed a bad guy during a video game, he was probably more 'fleshed-out' than any of this lot.' And they're dumb.  And by dumb I mean painfully dumb.  They have a hundred and one times to get rid of this - seemingly indestructible - woman and don't, only to give her back the upper hand a scene or two later.

It just gets worse.  Or better - if you look at it in terms of how much fun you can take out of its absurdity.  The skinny little woman/hero puts grown me in 'sleeper' holds and then takes out two at a time.  And so on.  If she had superpowers (ala Wonder Woman or Trinity) it wouldn't be a problem 'in universe,' but she just looks so out of her depth when the stunt men have to throw themselves about the set to try and maintain the illusion that they're getting beaten up.  

This could have worked - as a parody (or just give her superpowers), but the fact that the film-makers try and pass this off as 'realistic' is too much for me to actually believe.  It becomes so stupid it's laughable.

4/10