• Hello,Welcome to Play.com.  . (Not youSign in?) | Register
  • 0 SuperPoints
  • Your Account
  • Help

Product Reviews

Reviewer:
FALCONCRESTFAN
Reviews:
0
Votes:
20 (40% helpful)

Page 1 of 0

  1.  OUTSTANDING AND A TOTAL CLASSIC

    Posted: 

    What a totally brilliant, wickedly camp, wickedly witty and utterly enjoyable movie. Films of this calibre come around oh-so infrequently...but when they do, they are sensational entertainment and will live in the memory forever.

    For me, the bittersweet comedy melodrama, sheer gut-laugh comic moments and ripples of black comedy throughout blend seamlessly.

    Terence Stamp is priceless as the 'been there, done that' jaded, wise, deadpan old drag queen and delivers some amazing scenes, with brilliant dialogue and intelligent direction being features throughout the story.

    My own personal moment of joy comes when Bob's Thai mail-order bride does her 'bit' on stage...and then delivers one of the funniest lines ever, when she dumps her long-suffering hubby the following morning!

    Altogether, a total 'must see' movie. Pure, unadulterated 'class'.

    Mark C. Edwards

  2.  TWO OF THE FINEST HORROR MOVIES EVER MADE

    Posted: 

    There is really, from my point of view, very little to say about these two modern-day 'zombie-esque' apocalyptic thrillers apart from simply saying that they are both utterly brilliant!

    You are in for a white-knuckle, rollercoaster ride from minute one of each, and whilst 28WL has a somewhat different, more Hollywood-esque feel to it, it is no less engaging and entertaining in its own unique way.

    I am now eagerly awaiting 28 Months Later. I understand that Danny Boyle has it underway, and that we MAY possibly see the outstanding Cillian Murphy and Brenda Gleeson reprise their 28DL roles for the third (doubtless equally amazing) instalment.

    I hope the rumours are true, because the chemistry between those two really played a vital role in making the original movie such a big hit.

    So treat yourself to these two little gems of sci-fi horror. You will not be disappointed.

    Mark C. Edwards

  3.  BLAND AND POINTLESS REMAKE

    Posted: 

    Those of us who are old enough to recall the original excellence of the 1976 Omen 1 were generally suprised when this remake popped up. I never thought that they would dare try to improve on such a classic. It was bound to go wrong.

    It did.

    It isn't so much a 'bad' movie...just a 'poor man's Omen 1976'...it simply isn't as atmospheric, exciting or well-acted as the original...therefore it is utterly pointless.

    A lesson learned, maybe.

    There are SOME movies that are just SUCH classics, that to remake them is utter stupidity. Movies such as The Sound of Music, Star Wars 1, etc... could NEVER EVER be remade with any credibility...The Omen trilogy of the seventies and early eighties is a further example.

    You may quite like this film if you are under 25 and have never seen the original. But even then, you may find it just 'OK' rather than 'great'.

    Mark C. Edwards

  4.  OK REMAKE OF THE CLASSIC

    Posted: 

    I am a Nic Cage fan, and so I knew that he would make a decent job of this movie. I wasn't disappointed.

    It may not add an awful lot to the 'original', but it does nevertheless provide a few more modern 'twists' within the overall plot. So it is worth a look.

    As I said in my original review of the 1973 version, this story is clever...but it does leave Christians like myself with a sickly feeling at the pit of the stomach.

    I wish someone would make a Wicker Man II, just to 'put things right' in a sense...it all needs a nice, 'Hollywood ending', where the nasty nutters of that beautiful little island get their comeuppance...Hollywood explosive style...and the new 'hero' emerges unscathed.

    Maybe Edward's 'journalist younger brother' could 'pursue the truth', visit the island and expose their evil doings?

    Just a thought, Hollywood.

    I will prepare a script for you, if you like.

    (dollar signs flash in front of eyes). :)

    Mark C Edwards.

  5.  A GREAT FILM...BUT DANGEROUSLY PRO-PAGAN

    Posted: 

    No-one could ever fault the quality of this original classic movie from 1973. The directing and scripting is flawless, and the acting truly superb, esp. from Edward Woodward and Christopher Lee.

    Even today, despite its age, this original is still as deeply unnerving and shocking...yet in a very subtle, and thus ever-more powerful way.

    As a Christian, I DID find the conclusion particularly disturbing...and it is clear to me that the writer had a specific pagan agenda to forfill...as if championing the rights of any given community to practice paganism, even to take it to its bloody extremes.

    I guess I am a bit of a sucker for a 'Hollywood ending', and I longed for an ending to soothe my own Christian sensitivities...however, this is a quality piece of film-making in the 'context' of what it is....an absolutely gripping and entriguing occult horror chiller.

    I am happy to recommend this film on the basis of its sheer quality. Though I still urge a little caution if, like myself, you hold your Christian faith dear and may be rather upset by something like this.

    MARK C EDWARDS.

  6.  ONE GREAT MOVIE...THE LEGEND LIVES ON

    Posted: 

    I was only ten when the original AW London movie came out in 1980...and wasn't allowed to see the orginal video release! But when I eventually watched AW London in 1985, as it premiered on BBC1, I found it thrilling and well worth the wait.

    Consequently, I was sort-of expecting to be a bit disappointed by any sequel.

    I was wrong.

    What a cracker this is. AW Paris is definitely a movie of its time...just as AW London was. AW Paris correctly draws on the latest technology in film-making, guaranteeing that the werewolves are big, brash, fast and extremely realistic...just as you might imagine them in your worst nightmare!

    The story may not be any 'better' than the original, but it is certainly 'as good' in a modern and totally different way, designed to draw in a wider, younger audience...as well as staying loyal to many features that make the original such a cult classic.

    The black comedy is still there...though this time it is distinctly 'Hollywood-ised', but still just as entertaining...again, in a different way.

    The mood is 'edgier' than the original...and the entire movie is packed with quirky twists and turns.

    I thought that the ending was refreshingly uplifting...most horror films end 'horribly'...this was just a nice change to all that...yet, it fitted with the storyline perfectly and was entirely credible.

    Altogether, the acting is competent...not 'spectacular', but nevertheless does justice to the terrific special effects. The director does a great job, too, ensuring that everyone stays on the edge of their seats.

    Do not listen to anyone who dismisses this movie as an 'unworthy sequel'...it is anything but. You just need to appreciate that it is a horror movie for the late nineties, just as AW London was 'right' for the time IT was made.

    Horror styles inevitably change as time goes on. AW London and AW Paris perfectly reflect this.

    They are so, so different to each other in so many ways.

    Yet the way they compliment each other is superb. AW Paris is a 'must-see' if you can appreciate the benefit of difference.

    MARK C EDWARDS.

  7.  GORY, SILLY AND OVER-INDULGENT

    Posted: 

    I consider myself to have a pretty strong stomach. I am one of those people who loves the general 'horror genre' concept...and I am all for 'realism' and effective 'shocks' in film-making.

    But I am afraid to say that, for my taste at least, the SAW series of movies, especially this one, go way too far down the gore-fest highway.

    I felt physically sick within twenty minutes of this movie. Maybe this was the intention of the director, but frankly it just detracted from the storyline itself...which then in turn ruined the whole movie.

    The actual storyline itself was 'OK', somewhat unbelievable, but hey, aren't they all?! That's why we love most of 'em!

    I was unimpressed by the standard of acting, in general. It was again 'OK', but nothing special...considering the money they must have spent of special effects, it hardly did them justice.

    The whole thing was rather like being transported to some sick, Victorian experimental hospital. The storyline, as I said, became blurred and irrelevant. The amount and degree of 'gore' was actually totally unnecessary. It was lazy film-making, a lack of thought and an attitude of: 'oh well, all they want is a bit of gore, we don't need to worry about whether they understand the plot or not.'

    In other words, the film maker showed an utterly patronising attitude towards the viewer. I don't care much for film makers that do this.

    I will not be indulging in any more SAW fests anytime soon.

    MARK C EDWARDS.

  8.  One of the Best Horror Movies EVER!

    Posted: 

    I have watched the 2004 'Dawn of the Dead' time and time again...and I never ever get bored with it...it grips me each time, and is quite simply amazing and compelling viewing.

    I love the way the movie begins with the air of utter 'normality', like it could be a regular melodrama/thriller...you are lulled into a false sense of security! Then, all of a sudden, Ann and Lewis's bedroom alarm clock clicks to '6.37am'...and everything changes FOREVER.

    From this point on, from the moment you see young Vivien caked in blood and bearing her teeth, the movie is rapid, dynamic, exciting, horrifying in the extreme and has the delicate 'under taste' of sheer black comedy running throughout...this somehow supplements the gore and gritty suspense perfectly, meaning that you can allow yourself to be genuinely terrified by this movie...yet have the reassuring feeling at the back of your mind that, actually, it's 'ok' really...it IS just a great horror 'yarn'...it takes the edge off your sheer 'terror' as you watch...but not in a detrimental way...somehow it 'works' beautifully and makes this movie, to my mind, utterly unique.

    I find the fact that the 'zombies' are vicious and strong and able to run fast all adds to the great sense of 'realism'...I am not a fan of the 'old style' 'Night of the Living Dead'-esque zombie flicks...infact, I find them utterly boring in comparison to Dawn of the Dead.

    Scary zombies SHOULD run and growl like werewolves! It grips the viewer and injects the necessary 'pace' that the modern viewer finds irresistable.

    This movie is ripe for a sequel, in my view. It ends in an utter cliffhanger, and you never really know if any of the final four 'escapees' survive the final zombie onslaught, which takes place during the closing credits.

    I am going to purchase the Director's Cut, as I always felt that the character of Andy had his own 'story' to tell...I am glad to see that the DC explores Andy further. Also, the terrestrial channel seemed to cut odd bits from the cinema/digital pay-per-view/satellite movie channel screenings...I am looking forward to seeing every last bit of gore, terror and unashamedly 'camp', black comedy in full!

    I would urge any horror genre fan to sample the delights of 2004's Dawn of the Dead...it is a terrific movie in every conceivable way, flawless scripting, acting and direction...you will not be disappointed.

    I cannot comment on the original 1978 movie, as I haven't seen it in full...but I may buy that too, though it will invariably seem dated...and thus less relevant, I guess. But it will be fun to compare both versions.

    Dawn of the Dead 2004...a masterpiece of modern film-making.

    MARK C EDWARDS.