The story follows Raizo, a ninja who defects from his clan of assassination-trained orphans when they kill his sweetheart for trying to leave. Some Europol investigators are thrown into the mix pretty randomly and a veritable phantasmagoria of bloody conflict ensues as Raizo tries to avenge his fallen friend while protecting his newfound allies.
They really pulled out all the stops on this one. Geysers of thick, red, corn-syrupy blood, loudly swishing slow motion close-ups blades, and loads of seriously terrible one-liners make Ninja Assassin a must-see for any fan of martial arts who also enjoys having a laugh at a movie that has the guts to make jokes about itself. That’s the best feature of this movie—it knows it’s not to be taken seriously and behaves accordingly.
Probably worth seeing on the big screen. Definitely not for the easily queasy.
Great for a laugh with a friend.
28 November 2009
27 November 2009
New Moon (2009)
All I have to say about the latest installment of “The Twilight Saga” is OMG AWESOME. By that I mean that New Moon is a very appropriate and entertaining adaptation of the second book in the four-part series. It sticks to the original material quite faithfully, using interesting visuals to convey Stephenie Meyer’s addictive (albeit wholly silly) fantasy world of brooding undead and friendly shape-shifters.
Here is what happens: Edward leaves, Bella dies a little, Jacob is hunky. Edward is a drama queen, Bella leaves, Jacob is sooooo sad. Vampires and werewolves, etc. Teenagers—lol!
And as a serendipitous addition to this already guiltily pleasurable emotional rollercoaster, Kristen Stewart actually improves upon the Bella from the books, trading obnoxious whiney inner thoughts for a more compelling and nuanced melancholy moodiness. While the other actors stick to Meyer’s original characterizations, Stewart goes the extra mile of making Bella all the more believable and therefore more emotionally-investable as a character.
New Moon is an obvious must for any follower of Meyer’s books, but is also delightfully engaging for any fan of hyperbolic romance served up fantasy style. You won't regret seeing it on the big screen.
Here is what happens: Edward leaves, Bella dies a little, Jacob is hunky. Edward is a drama queen, Bella leaves, Jacob is sooooo sad. Vampires and werewolves, etc. Teenagers—lol!
And as a serendipitous addition to this already guiltily pleasurable emotional rollercoaster, Kristen Stewart actually improves upon the Bella from the books, trading obnoxious whiney inner thoughts for a more compelling and nuanced melancholy moodiness. While the other actors stick to Meyer’s original characterizations, Stewart goes the extra mile of making Bella all the more believable and therefore more emotionally-investable as a character.
New Moon is an obvious must for any follower of Meyer’s books, but is also delightfully engaging for any fan of hyperbolic romance served up fantasy style. You won't regret seeing it on the big screen.
23 November 2009
A Christmas Carol (2009)
Let me begin by saying that I love Charles Dickens’s classic novella “A Christmas Carol.” I’ve seen countless film adaptations of the story and it never gets old.1 I even dressed up as the unfortunate and terrible ghost of Jacob Marley for Halloween one year during high school after carefully reading the original to make sure I got the details right.
So when Robert “I shat upon the classic picture book The Polar Express by adding Tom Hanks and weird dead-eyed animated children into the mix” Zemeckis took this project on, I cringed, and not a little bit.2 But I went to see anyway it because I still love Dickens’s story, by gum. And as long as they didn’t deviate from the original plot too much, it couldn’t be all bad.
Much to my relief, it wasn’t too horrible at all. Yeah, you do have to contend with the “Ooh look at me using 3-D” moments. One too many scenes with Scrooge falling and flailing through the air for my taste. And yeah, you do have to deal with the persistently dead-eyed characters. I don’t care whether they did use retinal scanning technology to try to get rid of the dead eyes—it didn’t entirely work and the effect is alienating.
But happily the movie does deliver some of the most important pleasures of Dickens's original text. While surprisingly leaving the old style prose intact, Zemeckis nevertheless makes the effort to bring something new to the party by playing up the ghostly characters to an extreme. Plus Jim Carrey does an unexpectedly great job at interpreting many different roles, all mercifully distant from his previous less than fresh work.
Overall, not the best adaptation of Dickens’s story so far, but one which certainly promises many more yet to come. And I can't say humbug to that!
-----
1. Shout out to my all time favorite, The Muppet Christmas Carol (1992)!!
2. Not an entirely fair assessment of Zemeckis, to be sure—he has produced, written, and directed a number of movies that I have enjoyed quite a bit. I just took The Polar Express personally because, as a child who was literally devastated by the revelation that Santa isn’t real, I clung desperately to the message of faith that was in the original text of The Polar Express. I still have the little jingle bell that came with the book.
So when Robert “I shat upon the classic picture book The Polar Express by adding Tom Hanks and weird dead-eyed animated children into the mix” Zemeckis took this project on, I cringed, and not a little bit.2 But I went to see anyway it because I still love Dickens’s story, by gum. And as long as they didn’t deviate from the original plot too much, it couldn’t be all bad.
Much to my relief, it wasn’t too horrible at all. Yeah, you do have to contend with the “Ooh look at me using 3-D” moments. One too many scenes with Scrooge falling and flailing through the air for my taste. And yeah, you do have to deal with the persistently dead-eyed characters. I don’t care whether they did use retinal scanning technology to try to get rid of the dead eyes—it didn’t entirely work and the effect is alienating.
But happily the movie does deliver some of the most important pleasures of Dickens's original text. While surprisingly leaving the old style prose intact, Zemeckis nevertheless makes the effort to bring something new to the party by playing up the ghostly characters to an extreme. Plus Jim Carrey does an unexpectedly great job at interpreting many different roles, all mercifully distant from his previous less than fresh work.
Overall, not the best adaptation of Dickens’s story so far, but one which certainly promises many more yet to come. And I can't say humbug to that!
-----
1. Shout out to my all time favorite, The Muppet Christmas Carol (1992)!!
2. Not an entirely fair assessment of Zemeckis, to be sure—he has produced, written, and directed a number of movies that I have enjoyed quite a bit. I just took The Polar Express personally because, as a child who was literally devastated by the revelation that Santa isn’t real, I clung desperately to the message of faith that was in the original text of The Polar Express. I still have the little jingle bell that came with the book.
22 November 2009
The Cat Returns (2002)
One day Haru, a down on her luck school girl with poor self confidence, uses her lacrosse stick to daringly rescue a cat from getting hit by a truck. Haru is informed that she has unwittingly saved the Prince of Cats which she thinks is a hallucination until suspiciously cat-friendly gifts start showing up everywhere she goes (e.g. hordes of mice, a field of cattails, stores of catnip). She decides to travel to the Kingdom of Cats to stop the well meaning but often embarrassing gifts, but once there Haru finds herself engaged against her will to the Prince of Cats! Serious weirdness ensues.
This movie’s strength is definitely its tremendous oddness. From Haru’s unpredictable interactions with feline royalty to the crazy chase scenes involving rivers of cat minions that pick up characters and carry them away, everything from the plot to the imagery of this studio Ghibli production seems to be inspired by extreme stretches of the imagination.
Unfortunately any potential for greatness this crazy weird adventure has is dashed to bits by the poor quality of the animation. Characters change size and scale constantly leading to confusion regarding basic spatial relationships. Haru’s face is unexpressive to a problematic degree—there is little difference in her appearance when she is happy, scared, or angry. Continuity errors abound, backgrounds look cheaply done, and there are some serious issues with the way the animators handle changes in lighting.
However, despite the shoddy quality of animation I still definitely recommend this movie for its sheer whimsy. At the end of the day The Cat Returns is a delightful flight of fancy that will make you laugh and feel lighthearted, even while scratching your head and exclaiming “What?!”
This movie’s strength is definitely its tremendous oddness. From Haru’s unpredictable interactions with feline royalty to the crazy chase scenes involving rivers of cat minions that pick up characters and carry them away, everything from the plot to the imagery of this studio Ghibli production seems to be inspired by extreme stretches of the imagination.
Unfortunately any potential for greatness this crazy weird adventure has is dashed to bits by the poor quality of the animation. Characters change size and scale constantly leading to confusion regarding basic spatial relationships. Haru’s face is unexpressive to a problematic degree—there is little difference in her appearance when she is happy, scared, or angry. Continuity errors abound, backgrounds look cheaply done, and there are some serious issues with the way the animators handle changes in lighting.
However, despite the shoddy quality of animation I still definitely recommend this movie for its sheer whimsy. At the end of the day The Cat Returns is a delightful flight of fancy that will make you laugh and feel lighthearted, even while scratching your head and exclaiming “What?!”
20 November 2009
Coco before Chanel (2009)
This quiet biopic about Gabrielle “Coco” Chanel before she got famous is pleasant enough to watch but ultimately forgettable once you walk out of the theater.
It’s not that the acting or the plot is lackluster. On the contrary, it is quite engaging to see how Chanel goes from rags to riches by sheer force of will. Audrey Tautou artfully shows us just what kind of character is needed in order for Chanel to succeed, especially in light of the considerable obstacles with which an orphaned woman in turn of the century France was faced.
I think for me the problem was that the film did have some emotional content, showing Chanel in complicated romantic situations with a variety of men, but that somehow at the end of the day we could still only look on Chanel’s story from the outside. It was as though we had been invited to look through a window at her life, but never quite got invited inside to join in.
Perhaps this keeping the audience at arm’s length was the point; Chanel is repeatedly characterized as independent to the degree of aloofness throughout the film. However, this coldness had the effect of creating a certain degree of indifference in me toward Chanel—at the end of the film I didn’t really feel anything at all.
It’s not that the acting or the plot is lackluster. On the contrary, it is quite engaging to see how Chanel goes from rags to riches by sheer force of will. Audrey Tautou artfully shows us just what kind of character is needed in order for Chanel to succeed, especially in light of the considerable obstacles with which an orphaned woman in turn of the century France was faced.
I think for me the problem was that the film did have some emotional content, showing Chanel in complicated romantic situations with a variety of men, but that somehow at the end of the day we could still only look on Chanel’s story from the outside. It was as though we had been invited to look through a window at her life, but never quite got invited inside to join in.
Perhaps this keeping the audience at arm’s length was the point; Chanel is repeatedly characterized as independent to the degree of aloofness throughout the film. However, this coldness had the effect of creating a certain degree of indifference in me toward Chanel—at the end of the film I didn’t really feel anything at all.
18 November 2009
Pirate Radio (2009)
In the 1960s, BBC radio didn’t play rock music. So a bunch of dudes got on a boat and broadcast what everyone was secretly listening to anyway!
This movie is pretty entertaining, as ‘based on a true story’ movies go. Lots of talent is involved and there are plenty of laughs. The filmmakers keep it lighthearted, even when terrible things are happening. Very tongue in cheek, very fun. Makes the ‘60s look like the most awesome time ever. Excellent soundtrack, of course.
You probably don’t need to shell out to see it in theaters, though. It will make you just as happy as a rental.
This movie is pretty entertaining, as ‘based on a true story’ movies go. Lots of talent is involved and there are plenty of laughs. The filmmakers keep it lighthearted, even when terrible things are happening. Very tongue in cheek, very fun. Makes the ‘60s look like the most awesome time ever. Excellent soundtrack, of course.
You probably don’t need to shell out to see it in theaters, though. It will make you just as happy as a rental.
17 November 2009
Brick (2005)
Drug dealers and high school and hardboiled dialogue, oh my!
Brick successfully highlights the most ridiculous and the most interesting aspects of film noir, celebrating, critiquing, and updating the oft-debated and much loved genre in the process.
A word to the wise—watch this one when you’re not overly tired. With a complicated plot and extremely jargon-filled dialogue, you’ll need to be on your toes to process it. I actually had to have the captions on the first time I watched it because I got really lost.
Sound like your kind of movie? Check it out! It’s definitely one of my favorites.
Up next:
Up
Pirate Radio
Coco Before Chanel
Brick successfully highlights the most ridiculous and the most interesting aspects of film noir, celebrating, critiquing, and updating the oft-debated and much loved genre in the process.
A word to the wise—watch this one when you’re not overly tired. With a complicated plot and extremely jargon-filled dialogue, you’ll need to be on your toes to process it. I actually had to have the captions on the first time I watched it because I got really lost.
Sound like your kind of movie? Check it out! It’s definitely one of my favorites.
Up next:
Up
Pirate Radio
Coco Before Chanel
15 November 2009
Pi (1998)
There was just no chance that I was going to like this movie, regardless as to whether or not it was entertaining, or even “good”. But before I tell you why I was predisposed to hate it, let me tell you about all the things I disliked about it. Deep breath. Here goes.
The all-synthesizer soundtrack. The constantly overexposed, hokey black and white imagery (Wow. Symbolic.). The disgusting excess of references to Un chien andalou (1929). The bad acting. The pseudo-math. The “headaches.” The ejaculate-like goo that mysteriously appears in the computer. The computer itself. The whole premise of the movie. Darren Aronofsky. The sound quality of the recorded dialogue. The faces of the actors involved. The inclusion of the game ‘Go.’ The fact that no one even eats any pie over the whole course of the movie. The pills. The cigarettes. Sean Gullette’s manner. The DVD menu. The title. The credits.
In the interest of keeping myself from some kind of enraged psychotic break, I will not continue. But let me be clear: my obviously polemical opinion regarding Pi is not a result of me thinking that this movie was “not good”. This blog isn’t about objectively good or bad anything. Even if you think this is the best movie ever, if it is your favorite movie, if you watch it every Thursday at 3:14pm; we can still be friends. But only as long as you have your reasons for liking it, just as I have mine for disliking it (see above laundry list of annoyances).
If you haven’t noticed already, most of my reasons for liking or disliking certain movies have to do with emotions the movies bring up in me, or connections I made between some aspect of the movie and other thoughts or emotions or events. Sometimes I make my motives clear, other times I leave them unsaid.
In the case of Pi, I would like to be frank. My irritable, impossible-to-please attitude stems from many tedious conversations in which some person tried to tell me that I had bad or (worse), naïve, taste in movies because I didn’t think Aronofsky, or any other hero-worshiped “genius” of a director, was as awesome as my partner in conversation thought. Wow, guy in a bar. Wow, girl at a party. Wow, professor leaning back in the chair, enlightening me on the subject of “auteurs”. You think your opinion entitles you to lord your taste over mine. Good for you. But I don’t buy it.
There are probably a lot of movies referencing Buñuel’s work that I would enjoy. I know there are movies with over exposed, black and white images that I could list among my favorites. I actually enjoyed The Fountain. And who doesn't love a couple of movies that they know have atrocious acting?
But goddamnit. I feel the way I feel about Pi because it reminds me of all the times someone tried to tell me I don’t know my own mind. And that’s just not right.
Hopefully, even after all this, you still want to go and figure out yours. That's the whole point.
The all-synthesizer soundtrack. The constantly overexposed, hokey black and white imagery (Wow. Symbolic.). The disgusting excess of references to Un chien andalou (1929). The bad acting. The pseudo-math. The “headaches.” The ejaculate-like goo that mysteriously appears in the computer. The computer itself. The whole premise of the movie. Darren Aronofsky. The sound quality of the recorded dialogue. The faces of the actors involved. The inclusion of the game ‘Go.’ The fact that no one even eats any pie over the whole course of the movie. The pills. The cigarettes. Sean Gullette’s manner. The DVD menu. The title. The credits.
In the interest of keeping myself from some kind of enraged psychotic break, I will not continue. But let me be clear: my obviously polemical opinion regarding Pi is not a result of me thinking that this movie was “not good”. This blog isn’t about objectively good or bad anything. Even if you think this is the best movie ever, if it is your favorite movie, if you watch it every Thursday at 3:14pm; we can still be friends. But only as long as you have your reasons for liking it, just as I have mine for disliking it (see above laundry list of annoyances).
If you haven’t noticed already, most of my reasons for liking or disliking certain movies have to do with emotions the movies bring up in me, or connections I made between some aspect of the movie and other thoughts or emotions or events. Sometimes I make my motives clear, other times I leave them unsaid.
In the case of Pi, I would like to be frank. My irritable, impossible-to-please attitude stems from many tedious conversations in which some person tried to tell me that I had bad or (worse), naïve, taste in movies because I didn’t think Aronofsky, or any other hero-worshiped “genius” of a director, was as awesome as my partner in conversation thought. Wow, guy in a bar. Wow, girl at a party. Wow, professor leaning back in the chair, enlightening me on the subject of “auteurs”. You think your opinion entitles you to lord your taste over mine. Good for you. But I don’t buy it.
There are probably a lot of movies referencing Buñuel’s work that I would enjoy. I know there are movies with over exposed, black and white images that I could list among my favorites. I actually enjoyed The Fountain. And who doesn't love a couple of movies that they know have atrocious acting?
But goddamnit. I feel the way I feel about Pi because it reminds me of all the times someone tried to tell me I don’t know my own mind. And that’s just not right.
Hopefully, even after all this, you still want to go and figure out yours. That's the whole point.
14 November 2009
Paris, je t'aime (2006)
The conceptual predecessor to New York, I Love You, Paris, je t’aime is about relationships and love in the city of Paris. Each vignette of this film is named for the neighborhood in which it takes place. Transitions between each story are abrupt, marked only by a cut and an unobtrusive title appearing in one corner of the frame, which tells you which neighborhood you’re now in. There is ample quiet time at the beginning and end of each short to allow you to reflect on what you’ve seen.
Storylines run the gamut between a mother dealing with the loss of her child to mimes making eyes at each other in a jail cell. All different kinds of love, all different kinds of relationships, and all different kinds of people. Hopefully something for everyone.
I liked Paris, je t’aime more than New York, I Love You. I don’t know if it was the French language, the city it was set in, or just the construction of the film itself. But something about the former made the latter look a little like a cheap imitation in my eyes. Not so much that it was completely invalidated, but just enough to make me really appreciate the original.
You’ll have to see for yourself. Definitely worth watching.
Storylines run the gamut between a mother dealing with the loss of her child to mimes making eyes at each other in a jail cell. All different kinds of love, all different kinds of relationships, and all different kinds of people. Hopefully something for everyone.
I liked Paris, je t’aime more than New York, I Love You. I don’t know if it was the French language, the city it was set in, or just the construction of the film itself. But something about the former made the latter look a little like a cheap imitation in my eyes. Not so much that it was completely invalidated, but just enough to make me really appreciate the original.
You’ll have to see for yourself. Definitely worth watching.
11 November 2009
The Beaches of Agnes (Les plages d'Agnes) (2008)
This film is a remarkable reflection by filmmaker Agnes Varda on her life, both personal and professional.
The Beaches of Agnes is visually complex to an impressive degree—Varda layers images from previous films over reenactments of events from her childhood, relayed through mirrors and frames, filtered through even more layers of images, sometimes with commentary from a cartoon cat said to represent the voice of a famous filmmaker of the French New Wave, of which Varda was a part. A mixture of whimsical and tragic, strange and yet strikingly familiar, none of the imagery or commentary can be said to operate around a central theme. Except perhaps the tricky tendencies of memory.
Events and images overlap, temporality is unclear, symbols and metaphors recur but their meanings shift and change. Varda herself provides fewer answers than questions; she makes no pretense of guiding the viewer on a tour of her career or her life, but rather works through her musings on life on her own time. What she shares with us is not a neat autobiography, but rather a collage of the thoughts that might cross through her mind when she thinks back on where she’s been.
What this all amounts to is a movie that requires thought, through and through. Should you choose to spend your time contemplating Varda’s, you may come away feeling lost, puzzled, or perplexed.
This film also, on some level, requires knowledge of Varda’s work—a oeuvre of which a sadly small number of people have knowledge. If you are interested in checking out her movies, which I highly suggest, skim her imdb profile for releases that interest you. Her Cleo from 5 to 7 made it onto my top ten list a while back, but she has many other gems to offer. Some are available on Netflix, and more are coming soon thanks to the Criterion Collection’s recent-ish release of a box set of her films.
Even if you haven’t seen her movies, I think you should still check this one out at your local art house theater, or at least snag it when it comes to DVD.
A truly rare, sincere intervention into memory, film, and life.
The Beaches of Agnes is visually complex to an impressive degree—Varda layers images from previous films over reenactments of events from her childhood, relayed through mirrors and frames, filtered through even more layers of images, sometimes with commentary from a cartoon cat said to represent the voice of a famous filmmaker of the French New Wave, of which Varda was a part. A mixture of whimsical and tragic, strange and yet strikingly familiar, none of the imagery or commentary can be said to operate around a central theme. Except perhaps the tricky tendencies of memory.
Events and images overlap, temporality is unclear, symbols and metaphors recur but their meanings shift and change. Varda herself provides fewer answers than questions; she makes no pretense of guiding the viewer on a tour of her career or her life, but rather works through her musings on life on her own time. What she shares with us is not a neat autobiography, but rather a collage of the thoughts that might cross through her mind when she thinks back on where she’s been.
What this all amounts to is a movie that requires thought, through and through. Should you choose to spend your time contemplating Varda’s, you may come away feeling lost, puzzled, or perplexed.
This film also, on some level, requires knowledge of Varda’s work—a oeuvre of which a sadly small number of people have knowledge. If you are interested in checking out her movies, which I highly suggest, skim her imdb profile for releases that interest you. Her Cleo from 5 to 7 made it onto my top ten list a while back, but she has many other gems to offer. Some are available on Netflix, and more are coming soon thanks to the Criterion Collection’s recent-ish release of a box set of her films.
Even if you haven’t seen her movies, I think you should still check this one out at your local art house theater, or at least snag it when it comes to DVD.
A truly rare, sincere intervention into memory, film, and life.
10 November 2009
Hamlet 2 (2008)
Silliness for silliness’s sake is pure joy to watch. At least for me. And that, my friends, is the best way I can describe Hamlet 2.
We were blessedly spared any overwrought ideas. We were asked to try to understand no metaphors. We were left with no political messages to wade through, and no overbearing comedic personality trying to sell us his point of view. No subject was too taboo to bring up, no group was too sacred to joke about.
It was brazenly ridiculous, and I loved this movie for that reason. I’d recommend it to anyone with an appreciation for the absurd.
We were blessedly spared any overwrought ideas. We were asked to try to understand no metaphors. We were left with no political messages to wade through, and no overbearing comedic personality trying to sell us his point of view. No subject was too taboo to bring up, no group was too sacred to joke about.
It was brazenly ridiculous, and I loved this movie for that reason. I’d recommend it to anyone with an appreciation for the absurd.
08 November 2009
The Men Who Stare at Goats (2009)
This one isn’t worth saying too much about, other than that it is not as terrible as you may have heard.
It was a funny bit of fluff, quirky and entertaining at moments. Lots of silly pop-culture references. Some nicely executed slapstick. Big name actors running around willy-nilly in the desert.
Simply put, The Men Who Stare at Goats doesn’t strive to be too thoughtful or to get at any deeper themes. It just wants to give you a few chuckles and then let you move on with your day.
Probably best as a rental for when you’re bored and can’t find anything else.
It was a funny bit of fluff, quirky and entertaining at moments. Lots of silly pop-culture references. Some nicely executed slapstick. Big name actors running around willy-nilly in the desert.
Simply put, The Men Who Stare at Goats doesn’t strive to be too thoughtful or to get at any deeper themes. It just wants to give you a few chuckles and then let you move on with your day.
Probably best as a rental for when you’re bored and can’t find anything else.
07 November 2009
Queen of the Damned (2002)
Why did this movie not make it onto my top ten worst list? Because it is so bad that in order to protect my mental health, my brain quietly erased it from my conscious memory.
And so, during a post-Halloween all day lay-around-a-thon, it was with a sort of naïve, blank-slate attitude that I happily agreed to watch Queen of the Damned. That’s how my day of quiet post-sugar-rush relaxation transformed into a day of unspeakable outrage.
Even if I couldn’t describe myself as the kind of person who as a teenager read every single one of Anne Rice’s novels, even if I wasn’t a fan of movies about the occult, even if I didn’t readily volunteer myself for bits of camp based on popular culture… I would still be embittered by the mere existence of this movie.
Horrifyingly terrible acting by everyone involved, bizarre non-sequiturs, bad jokes, the inexplicable inclusion of the band Korn, and some seriously immature plot points came together with a large budget to make an outrageously vomitous pastiche of not only Rice’s original material, but also of any shred of a decent film that may have originally existed in the mind of any of the cast or crew.
Sickeningly decadent, but not in the way it was intended.
Kudos to you, makers of Queen of the Damned. You’ve inspired me to work some complaints back into my phantasmagoria. Big time.
Up Next:
Hamlet 2
Beaches of Agnes
The Men Who Stare at Goats
And so, during a post-Halloween all day lay-around-a-thon, it was with a sort of naïve, blank-slate attitude that I happily agreed to watch Queen of the Damned. That’s how my day of quiet post-sugar-rush relaxation transformed into a day of unspeakable outrage.
Even if I couldn’t describe myself as the kind of person who as a teenager read every single one of Anne Rice’s novels, even if I wasn’t a fan of movies about the occult, even if I didn’t readily volunteer myself for bits of camp based on popular culture… I would still be embittered by the mere existence of this movie.
Horrifyingly terrible acting by everyone involved, bizarre non-sequiturs, bad jokes, the inexplicable inclusion of the band Korn, and some seriously immature plot points came together with a large budget to make an outrageously vomitous pastiche of not only Rice’s original material, but also of any shred of a decent film that may have originally existed in the mind of any of the cast or crew.
Sickeningly decadent, but not in the way it was intended.
Kudos to you, makers of Queen of the Damned. You’ve inspired me to work some complaints back into my phantasmagoria. Big time.
Up Next:
Hamlet 2
Beaches of Agnes
The Men Who Stare at Goats
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
