Movie maniac, animation afficionado, Tumblr trekker, part-time procrastinator, fat fetishiser, computer c-- HEY WHERE ARE YOU GOING
Also, please don't thank me every time I vote on something of yours. Once is enough.
Me elsewhere on the interwebs:
The moviegoing side of my ego elsewhere:
Occupation: VHS conversion, hardcore moviegoer
About my collections
1/10 = Hell/Flipping sucks
2/10 = Terrible
3/10 = Pretty damn terrible
4/10 = Lame
5/10 = Mediocre
6/10 = Okay
7/10 = Decent
8/10 = Good
9/10 = Very good
10/10 = Great/Perfection
Posted : 2 years, 2 months ago on 1 August 2013 12:36
(A review of Space Jam
[Link removed - login to see]">Click here to view the Tumblr version.
Getting the Looney Tunes Golden Collection DVD box set for birthday and watching every single cartoon on the discs, my interest in the Looney Tunes has risen just about as high as the Muppets when I first saw Jason Segel's movie. I even looked at my old Looney Tunes annuals and found the comics funny as a 20 year old, the best coming from Dave Alvarez. One of those comics was a Lola Bunny comic in which she went on a Lara Croft style adventure which turned out to be another day in her life as a pizza delivery girl. Later came Who Framed Roger Rabbit's 25th anniversary, and I imagined what life would be like for cartoon characters with the current state of the animation industry. The next month, I watched their newest Cartoon Network sitcom, and the more of it I watched, the more I thought, "You know what? I think I'll review Space Jam!"
Space Jam is basically a movie about Michael Jordan's life post retirement with Looney Tunes added in to make it exciting. It was the second film by music video and commercial director Joe Pytka, whose first film was an action comedy without any cartoonish or sci-fi elements. Of course, having directed the "Hare Jordan" spots, which first paired Michael Jordan and Bugs Bunny and became successful enough to get this movie made, he at least knew about handling green-screen and animation. It was a hit at its time - its songs were memorable, one even received an award, it made heaps of money at the box office, its website is the longest living movie website on the whole internet, and even today it's considered a nostalgic cult classic. Hell, I owned the VHS as a child and then the DVD which came with Back in Action. Then again, when you're a child, everything's great. So let's see why the more you know about Looney Tunes, the worse the movie gets.
As this movie has less than 100,000 votes on the IMDB for a movie that was a hit in the 90's, some of you may still be curious. Well, here's the whole story. MJ's retired basketball for baseball. After he announces this, we are abruptly taken to an alien world where everyone is a cartoon, just like the inhabitants of the Earth's core. A theme park boss voiced by Danny DeVito (obviously) sends some aliens down to capture the Looney Tunes (who live in the Earth's core) so that he can turn his boring amusement park into Six Flags in outer space. Meanwhile, Michael Jordan is just spending some regular time with his family. Scrap that. Down in Tune Land, which can be visited just by ripping through the WB shield underground (God knows how they get back), the aliens (Nerdlucks) and the Looney Tunes must decide what challenge they should put against the aliens to see if they get enslaved or not; apparently this interrupts a classic Road Runner cartoon. The Looney Tunes, being the tricksters most of them are, could have easily just kicked their alien butts into oblivion and called it a day, but no, they simply choose a basketball game because they are slow and puny.
The Nerdlucks proceed to turn into goo that steals the talents of NBA's top players, one of them being the singer of the movie's theme song, and use the ball to turn themselves into the exact opposite of their girly-sounding midget selves. The Looney Tunes, who have tackled a giant, a martian, an orange monster and even a dinosaur, are too wimpy to take them on. So wimpy that Porky Pig makes a pee joke. They could've at least blown them to smithereens with their explosives and ray guns in the first place, but no, it's clear that despite a scene where classic cartoons are played on multiple TV screens, Joe Pytka and the rest of the crew haven't watched enough Looney Tunes.
So they steal Michael Jordan from his game of golf and persuade him to help them win the game. He doesn't quite agree until he first meets the giant aliens, now called "Monstars". Similar to how Eddie Valiant was squished by the elevator's speed and grabbed his hat as he started falling from the top of a hotel, Michael Jordan gets squished into a basketball by a Monstar and forgets about both that and the fact that he was able to fit through such a small hole when his friend is flattened without any gore involved and blown up like a balloon. Of course, this wasn't the first time a black man was squished into a basketball and still talked. The last time was in a Troma film.
After we are given a montage of the NBA stars struggling to cope with their lack of skills and MJ's friends Wayne Knight and Bill Murray (because Ivan Reitman) trying to dig him out, we are introduced to Lola Bunny, whose talents at basketball get the toons interested (Tweety actually calls her "hot"), Bugs much more than that, enough to join the team. She also punishes those who happen to call her "doll". Being a rabbit in the shape of a human being, she is considered to be one of the reasons furries exist, besides Minerva Mink. She was intended to be a replacement for Honey Bunny, a plug for feminine interest and a successor to Jessica Rabbit. Unfortunately, she isn't as Looney as even Red Hot Riding Hood. There is a part where she goes wild after kissing Bugs the second time, but we'll get to that later.
People say that she has little personality, but I don't agree with them. She's athletic, independent and tomboyish, a good role model for girls. Except that's the main problem with her - she ain't funny (then again, neither is anyone in this movie), she gets treated too well, and her personality traits do not belong in the Looney Tunes canon. What, are kids going to shoot themselves next? Even worse, this new character only gets up to three minutes and three quarters of screen time and it doesn't help that she often disappears in scenes she's supposed to be in.
But here's here the real kick in the balls comes in - a member of the Toon Zone forums remembers finding an interview which was either featured on television or in a magazine with Looney Tunes master Friz Freleng, who died a year before Space Jam was released, during Bugs Bunny's 50th anniversary. He said that having a permanent girlfriend (Daisy Lou was a one-timer) would spoil Bugs' reputation as a troublemaker, as he would have to "stay out of trouble". I'm not one for spoiling movies like many of the modern reviewers who have seen Doug Phunny's review of Space Jam, but when we last see Lola, MJ reminds Bugs to "stay out of trouble". Bugs replies, "You know I will," and kisses Lola on the lips. Still think Space Jam is cool?
Minutes before that happens, Wayne Knight finds Bugs and Daffy snooping around in the real world, and goes through the hole (God knows how) to re-unite with MJ. The Tune Squad gears up that evening and the crowd is already cheering, though we'll go into more detail about that later. Predictably they suck at first, with Granny taking the abuse because she's old unlike Lola who's the only one to score because feminism and Sniffles getting his like-or-dislikable ass handed to him.
In the next round, they strive to win the game by shoehorning in as much cartoon slapstick as possible. Yosemite Sam and Elmer Fudd spoof Tarantino by shooting a Monstar's teeth off, Witch Hazel appears out of nowhere, Granny gets abused again, the audience sits where they're bound to get hurt and Lola Bunny tries to be funny by calling out "Nice butt" in front of a Monster whose shorts have fallen down, but fails miserably. The same Monstar gets his butt painted red by Daffy and painfully lifted into the air by Toro because that Monstar is FAT ROFLMAO. Earlier in the movie Taz's face gets a close-up, which are done like crazy, and snot is dripping from his nose. Warner Bros. may have animated butts before Ren & Stimpy made them cool, but unfortunately this was the decade where cartoons began to rip off Ren & Stimpy, and doing it to a cartoon that never meant to be gross in any way is a step too far. Anyway, Lola almost gets squished, Wayne Knight definitely gets squished, Bill Murray goes down the hole to help the Tune Squad, Danny DeVito breaks the fourth wall by confusing him for Dan Aykroyd and that's all I have to say about this ridiculous plot.
The animation isn't too bad, involving such talent as Roger Rabbit animators Chuck Gammage, Uli Meyer, Gary Dunn and Richard Williams veteran Neil Boyle, but at times doesn't look convincing enough. It doesn't help that the shading is overdone and misused - why do the Looney Tunes need to be CG-shaded in their own painted world? Don't get me wrong, it also happened in Roger Rabbit but at least it was used wisely.
There's hardly any shot of Michael in the Tune world that isn't accompanied by any Looney Tunes or at least another character; it's as if they're trying to grab kids' attention by cramming as many of them into each shot as possible when they could be taking roles of their own. After all, the Looney Tunes weren't always meant to be the same but this is ridiculous.
Another gripe I have with the animation is the crowd during the big game. I understand this was completed in 1996, but the crowd just looks so rushed. It consists of "ORIGINAL CHARACTER DO NOT STEAL" versions of well-known Looney Tunes characters, such as Claude the Cat, Penelope, Pete Puma, the Three Bears, Hippity Hopper, Playboy Penguin and Egghead Jr., who are stretched and squashed to ludicrous sizes, coloured in turquoise and purple, occasionally face-swapped, clearly pixelated when seen on Blu-Ray, apparently ghosts, never in the same position in each shot, always happy no matter who wins and at the same visible speed even in slow-motion. Forget the background pony "clones", this is something to complain about.
As for the rest, there are many close-ups in this film that are so extreme that they make the shots in Tom Hooper's Les Miserables look distant. The music from James Newton Howard is fine enough, and the songs are catchy and memorable (unless you aren't into rap, like me). There are also plot holes by the dozen, like Michael Jordan forgetting what happened to him earlier when he asked "How did he do that", and the crowd gasping with shock when Bugs Bunny gets squished when there were more brutal things happening to the other players. Dee Bradley Baker's Daffy, who is a mixture of both his wacky and jerky personalities, and Billy West's Bugs sound a lot younger than they're supposed to be, but that doesn't mean to say they're bad at all. Kath Soucie does a cute voice for Lola, who only gets, like, several lines. However, I feel that Danny DeVito could've given off a better performance as his character, Mr. Swackhammer. Even worse, Michael Jordan isn't as good at acting as he was at basketball. No wonder there's so much Looney Tunes characters around him.
Not even classic Looney Tunes veteran Chuck Jones approved of Space Jam, saying Lola Bunny is "worthless", and neither did his friend Joe Dante, who responded by making Looney Tunes: Back in Action years later. This film, unlike Space Jam, tanked at the box office but did better with critics, but that doesn't mean to say it can be considered Fresh. For many of its flaws, it's still not a bad movie. Sure it's a little too cynical, it breaks the fourth wall too many times for its own good and Taz's fart joke is worse than any of the attempts at Ren & Stimpy humour in Space Jam, but it remains satirical and silly, with a better understanding of the Looney Tunes than Joe Pytka's vision (except for the fart joke, of course).
It was designed as the "anti-Space Jam", and it makes fun of excessive product placement by slapping a Wal-Mart into the desert, whereas Space Jam was nothing but an advertisement, and the bad acting from its human actors fits well unlike Michael Jordan's bad acting (he makes a brief cameo). And although Lola makes an appearance on a blurry poster if you look closely, her existence is poked fun at by Jenna Elfman, who clearly wants to make Space Jam all over again. The Looneys are CG-shaded all the time in the live-action world, but thankfully they do the fully animated sequences the old-fashioned way, without any out-of-place shading.
Chuck Jones may have said Lola Bunny has no future, and I think he'd puke if he ever saw The Looney Tunes Show, which like Space Jam changes the Looney Tunes' personalities, as Bugs, Daffy and Porky are now the Aqua Teens, gives them an interest in basketball, uses CGI, usually isn't that funny and adds in Lola Bunny. But you know what? This Lola makes the show watchable in every episode. Not because of sexual appeal, but that she's the exact opposite of tomboyish Lola - a dumb blonde voiced by Kristen Wiig who's a lot loonier than you'd expect from those traits. And I love her.
She may not appeal to everyone, as people may find her annoying (which is the whole point), clichéd or just not as attractive as the original. I respect that, but if you complain that she's not a role model than I urge you to go and pick up the Looney Tunes Golden Collection DVDs and see how much you've been missing. That's right, as strange as it sounds I think a modern update on Looney Tunes where the Looney Tunes live in the suburbs ain't as bad as people think, and at the same time know everything about the Looney Tunes from watching hundreds of classic cartoons. And that's why Space Jam is so mediocre.
All in all, Space Jam may not be terrible, at it's easy to understand why it became such a cult classic in the first place, but it's the worst thing to happen to the Looney Tunes since the 60's. It's evidence that Warner Bros. doesn't treat their most iconic cartoon characters as well as Disney treats Mickey Mouse (even Mickey Mouse Clubhouse was faithful!). Obviously they weren't aiming for a movie as good as Who Framed Roger Rabbit, they were going more for a more kid-friendly film, but that's the problem with kid-friendly films - they need to at least please the parents as well, because many Looney Tunes cartoons were made for adults in the first place. Space Jam may be sweet and tasty for kids and nostalgia brats, but for Looney Tunes know-it-alls and snobs like me, it's more than just cartoons and basketball. And that's not really a good thing.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
Posted : 4 years, 8 months ago on 2 February 2011 07:43
(A review of The Nostalgia Critic
I'm sure many of you will disagree with me, but you're never going to enlighten my sense of humour if you try to correct me. Not everyone likes it. This might lose me some friends...
Overtime, I have watched a few videos from That Guy With The Glasses, and the flaws of the site became more clear to me. I started to lose my sense of humour towards it, and stopped watching it. The Cinema Snob is admittedly the funniest on the site, even if he yells too much nowadays, yet the Nostalgia Critic doesn't really appeal to me anymore because what he's doing has made him lose his voice twice in his internet existence. He also turns his head to the right for absolutely no reason whatsover when he talks. The reviewing style of him and most of the other people on ThatGuy was never intended to be real reviewing, and that's exactly the problem. It's better to waste 20 minutes of your time watching a bad movie including riffs, yet Doug often goes too far and spoils his guilty pleasures. The one positive thing about this is that it differs from his sarcastic review of The Adventures of Sonic the Hedgehog, where he said negative things about the show just so he could get more money. But this is extremely negative because we get spoiled over a movie that might have gotten decent reviews from real critics, such as Conan the Barbarian and Commando. Doug must include a spoiler warning before these kinds of reviews, because he already does it before his Bum Reviews. When he concluded his reviews of Theodore Rex and The Room, he told us to see them when we already saw them in 20 minutes. It's a good thing I deleted my Don Bluth reviews, because I was a huge fanboy until now.
The other flaws about his reviews are the constant uses of running gags, storylines and cameos. Doug himself is sick of the Zuul gag, but not the celebrity phone calls or Chuck Norris. I think Chuck Norris is one of the worst memes on the internet. Storylines and reviews do not mix unless the review has involvement in the story or it isn't forced, and the ending of his review for The Garbage Pail Kids Movie is just audiovisual whining. One of the problems with the Nostalgia Critic's review of The Room was that the cameos of Linkara and Spoony were forced and unnecessary, as if they were being attention whores. The review itself was so flawed that fanboys never noticed and boycotted Tommy Wiseau dressed as the Nostalgia Critic when Wiseau sued Doug over using his footage. There are currently over 500 cameos in the history of Channel Awesome, and it gets old real fast. it doesn't matter if the character has a stiff neck (Film Brain), overreacts (Angry Joe) or whose career is devolving (Spoony). It only matters when it comes to the Distressed Watcher, and he's the downright worst on the site. Except he's not the only one who isn't original.
The Nostalgia Critic seems to unintentionally copy the format of British comedians he doesn't know about like Harry Hill or Charlie Brooker, as well as Film Brain, except he knows about them because he is British. Noah Antweiler has never admitted the influence comic book character Doktor Sleepless has had on his Doctor Insano character, and neither has Doug, because I don't think he knows about [Link removed - login to see]">the original Bum or [Link removed - login to see]">the original Ask That Guy. Kickassia also gets worse the second time around, since to this day Doug has never talked about Kick-Ass. Kickassia is also nothing but 90+ minutes of people playing around, making fun of movies, making pointless references to The Simpsons and forcing cameos into their movie, even if they make jokes about them. Also, Doug has sold a DVD of Kickassia, when we can already watch it online for free. It still gives him money, though, since the majority of people on the site use Blip, using a crapload of irritating advertising that we do not want to see and is barely skippable.
You know why I'm one of the only ones out of my friends on Rotten Tomatoes who doesn't hate FernGully? It's because the Nostalgia Critic and Chick did. I never even wanted to watch his review of Waterworld - I just wanted to wait until its next airing on SyFy. I would respect an opinion on TGWTG, but many people seem to overblow it and won't stop making videos about him or involving him in yaoi. I had a YouTube channel called TheWorstMoviesEver (now TheWMEforever), and I copied the style of the Nostalgia Critic at times, but at least I was actually uploading the full movies and not completely reviewing them. Many people seem to copy Channel Awesome these days, and I regret doing so because every review these days has to be fake. It seems that in the future, the only reviews we will ever get will be videos of people playing characters that we should be enforced to trust. The Nostalgia Critic is becoming the next Twilight! Sure, you may think I'm jealous of him, because he has more money and popularity than me, but, honestly. Not to be homophobic, but do I sound like I want a hyperactive fanbase that will treat me as if I'm gay?
Welcome to the future of opinion, my friends. If you want, you can go and hate on me just because I hate these people. Angry Joe did it too.
Internet video reviewing sucks. (Mostly)
0 comments, Reply to this entry
Posted : 5 years, 2 months ago on 25 July 2010 04:35
(A review of The Karate Kid
This movie 5.9/10 on the IMDB, which differs from what the others think. And why? Because it's a remake! All you fans of the original Karate Kid judged the remake too hard when you saw the trailer. Just because it's a remake, doesn't mean it's always going to be bad. Not everyone will like it, but I did! It completely destroyed my expectations positively. It is only close to being as good as the original, and two memorable scenes are changed, but there are a lot of things Jerry Weintraub couldn't afford back in 1984, such as a real kid (the original kid was, believe it or not, in his early 20's), a true kung fu master, a trip to China or the chick from Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon. It doesn't even beat Toy Story 3, but then again, what will?
What surprised me in this film was that a song from the end credits of Hancock is used, when that was another film by Will Smith. The "Poker Face" song by Lady GaGa is also used, so beware Lady GaGa haters. That's the only song I've heard from her, but I obviously thought that it would get worse if they used Kesha. But this movie also used a song by Justin Bieber, but then again, I did enjoy Bolt... This movie also has some subtlety, such as part-English part-Chinese credits due to the fact it's co-produced in China, and when Dre (Jaden Smith) has problems watching his favourite show since it's dubbed in Chinese. This movie also shows us that that's not the only reason why it sucks to movie to China. Those Chinese bullies make the American ones seem bland. Jaden Smith does a good performance in this, and Jackie Chan makes up for The Spy Next Door. He's no Drillbit Taylor, he''s his old self. And he really lives up to the character he's playing - I heard in an interview that his English isn't perfect in real life, either. But that's not the only thing I heard, because you don't want to mess with Jaden - he got a sword for his birthday!
Like I said, the movie doesn't really improve over the original, but it improves on the other films. And thank God it doesn't have monks playing Zen sports in it, because I'd be disappointed if this remake got a whole quadrilogy. It isn't even just a remake, it's a re-imagining. The settings are different, the characters have different names and races. I'll be happy to go racist over Death at a Funeral, because Jackie Chan was depicted as a dead guy in that remake. The karate isn't karate, it's kung fu, but they do make up for it. Besides, The Kung Fu Kid was the working title until they had problems because Jackie Chan had already voiced a monkey.The relationship between the male protagonist and his love interest brings more charm, the landscapes are eye candy and it's even a little less predictable. That doesn't stop Ralph Macchio's film from being better, but not even he minded!
The remake of Hairspray got 91% when that was released only 19 years after the original, even though some of the singing in that film has made me worry, but I loved the remake 3:10 to Yuma! The moral of the film is exactly the same as the other films of its kind, but the moral of this review is that remakes aren't always necessary; it depends how they turn out.
And by the way, why does Dre Parker's name seem familiar?
0 comments, Reply to this entry
Posted : 5 years, 3 months ago on 6 July 2010 06:07
(A review of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's Sherlock Holmes
I hated Transmorphers, I hated Sunday School Musical, I hated Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus, and don't get me started on those 2012 films that Roland Emmerich didn't do. So is it a surprise that this is actually their most entertaining film yet? I guess it is! Sure, Sherlock Holmes fighting dinosaurs and a huge mechanical dragon is the stupidest idea ever, as they have been used a lot by The Asylum, but this has done to The Asylum's filmography what Rampage did to Uwe Boll's.
Yes, I thought the movie so many people have been confusing the Guy Ritchie film over on Rotten Tomatoes was a guilty pleasure. I expected it to suck, but after reading some positive reviews, I decided to watch it for fun, and boy, did I get fun! The effects are a surprising improvement over The Asylum's other films, and just when you think this is all just another rip-off, The Asylum do something clever. Holmes fights against the villain, who is in a suit made of iron. It has a face which resembles an angry-looking person, and a can of air at the back. This movie has paid homage to Iron Man!
You might give me thumbs down for liking an Asylum film, but I'm not the only one. This surprised my expectations as much as the reviews for The Karate Kid remake. Trust me on this one (or don't), it's not as good as the Guy Ritchie film, but it's campy, stupid, and as a fun experience as tripping balls. If you like The Asylum (I hate it), or some silly, unoriginal fun (which can be a problem), you just might enjoy this! Seriously though, you might.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
Posted : 5 years, 6 months ago on 6 April 2010 12:22
(A review of Superbabies: Baby Geniuses 2
I have seen plenty of bad movies for the fun of it, but nothing can compare to the horror that is Superbabies: Baby Geniuses 2. That's right folks, this is THE worst movie ever made. If you were some sap that didn't like Star Trek 2, Toy Story 2, Terminator 2, Aliens or, hell, even The Godfather Part II, this movie might make you appreciate them a little more. This film is so awful, it managed to rank a high number on the IMDB's Bottom 100 and Rotten Tomatoes' list of worst movies. The comedic critic Willie Waffle even gave this movie an awesome -1/4, considering it to be one of the worst movies he's ever seen in his life. It's just that awful! I hate it hate it hate it hate it hate it hate it hate it hate it hate it hate it!
Most critically bashed movies have a weak plot, and so has this. Not just because of the idea but because there are random stupid things going on throughout. The plot is only 25% related to the first Baby Geniuses. At the beginning, you'll see babies trying to do fake baby talk. From this point you'll know it's a Rugrats rip-off. But when this happens...
ROSITA: I think he's saying you're full of...
...you'll want to turn it off straight away. But you just can't control yourself! You can't control the dire urge to sit through the whole thing! You'll have to suffer through Kahuna the non-Hawaiian superbaby using horrid special effects and stunt wire usage to beat up stereotype Nazis! (You know, for kids!) You'll have to suffer through the baby blabber as they "act"! You'll burn your ears listening to Jon Voight's crappy German accent as he tries to hypnotise children with his retarded use of mind control! You'll start hanging yourself until you die from it!
Kahuna has this indoor "playground", which is like "It's a Small World" after a bomb hit it, which gives the four main babies, Archie, Rosita, Finkleman (WOT) and Alex, costumes and superpowers, and they won't shut the hell up! Yeah, real babies won't shut up, but at least they don't speak like drunken 5 year olds! Because they're little kids, they have the most ridiculous costumes in the world. Meanwhile, Kahuna's dark past is revealed after he reasonlessly chats with Whoopi Goldberg and O-Town. He accidentally drank this potion as a baby which gave him his powers and was stuck at his age. So he's an adult who's a baby, I'd stick with real baby adults, like Baby Herman. One of the most horrendous parts is the battle sequence, where the most dated movie CGI imaginable is used and Bill Biscane, the racist German stereotype that would make some fans of the Killer Tomatoes think of Killer Tomatoes Strike Back. Zack, played by Eddie from Lost, gives Biscane pain by stomping NEAR his foot. Two females also have a catfight, but only for a few seconds. Rubbish. And guess what? Bill Biscane loses the game by turning into a friggin' baby!
This movie also has one of the worst endings I've ever seen: the hyperactive Archie waving in slow motion to Kahuna as he says "I've got an emergency over at Europe, but I'll be BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA"
Makes the last lines of 2012 seem worthy of an Academy Award for Best Screenplay.
While the first movie was released by TriStar, this movie is released by Triumph Films. Damn you, movie! You're just boasting! Every bad movie has bad acting, and the acting in this film is an atrocity. Especially from Jon Voight. Scott Baio is also in this, which destroys my childhood because he was Bugsy Malone. The babies' mouths are horribly CG'd and the voice acting is just wrong. The music is mostly music from the first Baby Geniuses recycled. Forget Transformers 2 and Disaster Movie, this movie offended me the most! Can you believe that this was nominated for 4 Razzies but didn't win any of them? Probably because the movie was such a flop at the box office. And guess what? Despite the horrible reception, this movie has a frickin' fanbase! When I made it popular using my two YouTube account, MaxieTheThird and TheWorstMoviesEver, I was attacked by people saying they loved the movie, it's the greatest thing since saggy breasts and that anyone who doesn't like it should be ashamed of themselves, saying insults like "f**k you this is the best". I didn't laugh, my hand just hit my eyes. What has happened to society? I can understand why they like Disney pop, Twilight and the Air Buddies franchise, but this? Good God! It's like saying that Theodore Rex is great just because it has dinosaurs in it!
I watched this thing on YouTube because paying for it would be stupid, although Channel Five in the UK recently had the balls to broadcast it on public television. There will be people saying "it's not the worst, Red Zone Cuba and Daniel - Der Zauberer are the worst." Every time a thing like that is said, God causes abortion. I'm not kidding. This movie is the perfect explanation of why I never want to get married - it's not cute, it's not so-bad-it's-good/boring/hilarious! It's so-bad-it's-horrible! I don't care if it's a kids movie, it's (almost) the worst movie of any genre! Worse than Batman and Robin! Worse than Ricky 1! Worse than all the rip-offs! Worse than a fangirl's biggest obsessions! Worse than the Troll franchise! Worse than any crappy horror or exploitation flicks, even those shot on video! Worse than anything else on the IMDB's Bottom 100! Worse than Twilight! Worse than the works of Freidberg/Seltzer, Ed Wood or Uwe Boll! Worse than Battlefield Earth! Worse than most of the animated Titanic movies! Worse than Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever! Worse than anything riffed by MST3K or Cinematic Titanic! Hell, even worse than the late Bob Clark's other works, Baby Geniuses 1 and Karate Dog! If there's anything worse than this film, it has to be In Search of the Titanic, a.k.a. Tentacolino, which you should not look up on YouTube if you're high. But still, DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE!
It will change your life forever! That is, if you're not retarded.
I would rate this 0/10, but Listal won't let me, so...
0 comments, Reply to this entry
Posted : 5 years, 6 months ago on 18 March 2010 07:23
(A review of Speed Racer
Hey, people! Was The Matrix too much of an understandable sight for sore eyes? Then have an eye-bleedingly good time with Speed Racer, because no-one cares about plots or epilepsy!
Speed Racer, based on the retro anime, wasn't that bad, but wasn't that good either. There are many people who aren't real critics who say this film is fun. Sure it may be fun, but guess what had to ruin it?
In a much-too-cartoonishly-colourful world where racing is a big thing and human names are just made up of words (mostly), Speed Racer is the fastest racer of all. Ever since he was a kid, Speed wanted to be a racer. When he was old enough, his dream came true. Now, well, I don't understand what the hell actually goes on in this movie. The film 's length doesn't help at all. All I remember is that the Racer family goes to a factory where Speed meets someone who is one of the villains of the story, he starts racing again, he goes to Asia, he competes with Racer X, he stays in a new home, he races again, he loses to Rex, he races yet again, he wins (OF COURSE!). It's just too complicated!
Here's what the pros are. The casting is good and some of the characters are likeable. Spritle (another weird name) and Chim-Chim the chimpanzee, for instance. They made me laugh. The acting is okay, though sometimes cheesy (this happens with Spritle sometimes). The music by Michael Giacchino was great, as his works always are. I loved the stunts, too. The special effects are decent, but I think you all know what ruined it.
And now the cons. The plot is quite misunderstandable. You wouldn't know where the hell this film was going. The colours were fit enough for an LSD trip, and look like they came out of Spy Kids 3 or Sharkboy and Lavagirl. The film is rated PG, though there's a few PG-13 jokes, such as the funny scene where Spritle gives the middle finger. Family fun! The costumes are just plain silly, for example Speed's father wears overalls in one scene that make him steal the appearance of Mario. The blue-screen effects are pretty weird. Some of the singing of the catchy movie version of the theme song could've been more appealing, too.
But the biggest con of all is how insane the special effects are. There's more CGI than Son of the Mask and even more dizziness than Cloverfield. Trust me, I got pretty dizzy from watching it. I watched it online since I couldn't be bothered to rent it, but thank God I didn't see it at the cinema or the IMAX. It also could cause seizures. They even have BLACK AND WHITE FLASHING LIGHTS, which could kill people that are epileptic. Some shots of the races are too long, because they just quickly zoom in to each character at times instead of just cutting to them, which is just evil. In some global cinemas, Cloverfield got a warning for the dizziness that it can cause, but why not Speed Racer? No wonder why it didn't do well in the box office. It's a good thing that the video game for this movie got a warning about seizures.
Overall, Speed Racer is a pointless rollercoaster ride of a movie, and I hate rollercoasters. The best viewing experience of the film is on a screen smaller than an HD one if you want to enjoy and survive through it. If it didn't try to make me feel sick, I would've loved it more. But since I was one of the 28% of the RT community that didn't like it as much as the other 72% which includes my friends, GODDAMN YOU, LARRY & ANDY AND YOUR DIZZIFYING DIRECTING!
0 comments, Reply to this entry
Posted : 5 years, 6 months ago on 17 March 2010 06:31
(A review of Mia and the Migoo
On Sunday, March 7th, I went to the National Film Theatre in London to see an animated film from France called Mia and the Migou. It's about a tan-skinned, long-haired (but not for long) girl named Mia who finds that in the rainforest she lives near, there may be monsters. Soon after, she encounters one, a big, friendly one. He calls himself a Migou, and when he speaks, he has a mouth on the front and back of his head. It's not everyday you see a monster like that! She then finds that there is more than one Migou, and this is where the French gain the brains of the Japanese - they turn big and gain the ability to use their eyes to rescue anyone from falling. She also makes friends with an ordinary French kid whose evil father wants to build a hotel where the magical tree that gives the Migous' life is. It's a strange, flawed story, I know, but if Hayao Miyazaki could bring so much weirdness, why not? Plus, it's not just made in France, but also in Italy and Taiwan, a country near Japan, so it's no surprise.
It may look like it's for kids, but it isn't necessarily for kids. There is some mature humour and thematic elements. The subtitles didn't help, either, because whoever subtitled it added cuss words like "sh*t", "arsehole" and "bastard"! Could you imagine if they did that with My Neighbour Totoro? "Holy sh*t, a bus that looks like a cat!" But still, it's a nice, vibrant, colorful and highly imaginative surprise with a unique style of animation. It's also probably the most environmentally friendly animated film since WALL-E! Reading this, you may be thinking of Avatar. It has an environmental message, a jungle, fantasy creatures, helicopters, a magical tree destruction and a bit of "nature strikes back". And believe it or not, this film came out in France exactly a year before Avatar! Oh boy, have I pissed off you Avatar haters. D:
0 comments, Reply to this entry
Posted : 5 years, 6 months ago on 17 March 2010 06:04
(A review of The Thief and the Cobbler
The Thief and the Cobbler, created by the animator responsible for Roger Rabbit and the Pink Panther, was a beautiful film. That is, if it ever were completed properly. The film is probably the big inspiration for Disney's Aladdin, which was just as great. The animation is so brilliant, not even the likes of Disney or Don Bluth could top it. It's a film you'd have to feel bad for, since it took up to 26 years to make and seemed to fail and get butchered.
It's about a cute mute (at least he should've been) named Tack, a cobbler, who might compare to Jo-Jo in the Blue Sky version of Horton Hears a Who. The other main character is the swamp-coloured, cheeky, silent thief (at least he should've been silent). He is crazy for gold stuff as Scrat from Ice Age is crazy for acorns and he stinks so much that his flies follow him everywhere he goes. Tack falls in love with the pretty Princess Yum-Yum, daughter of the lazy King Nod (the inspiration for the Sultan), which gets the blue vizier Zig-zag angry. Zig-zag is the inspiration for the Genie and Jafar who can say anything in rhymes and is voiced by Vincent Price. The most important thing the characters need to take care of though the Thief is just too greedy to know about is the set of three golden balls above the tallest minaret. If the balls were taken away, the dark, half-blind army of One-Eyes will attack.
I've seen the three main versions; the Recobbled cut, the Allied Filmmakers version and the Miramax version. First, I am going to talk about the Recobbled cut. This cut is made by a big fan named Garrett Gilchrist of a fan company named Orange Cow Productions. He compiled footage and original sound tracks he collected from all versions of the film and people who worked on the film, no matter if it's unfinished, low quality or animated poorly by Fred Calvert. He also included classical music to make it a little more epic. It could possibly the best fan edit ever made.
10/10 for the Recobbled cut.
The Allied Filmmakers/Majestic Films version, The Princess and the Cobbler, was released only in Australia and South Africa. It was taken away from Richard after Warner Bros. rejected it and completed quite badly by television animator Fred Calvert and the Completion Bond Company. Fred added extra animation that looked as if Don Bluth animated it (some of the extra animation was produced at his studio), dialogue for Tack and crappy songs that made it quite a rip-off of Aladdin. Fred also changed the plot by mixing up scenes a little. The Thief was still silent, only making a few gasping, grunting or chuckling noises, and Zig-zag kept his great Vincent voice.
3/10 for The Princess and the Cobbler.
Miramax picked up Fred's edit, called it "Arabian Knight" and ruined it. They turned what could've been a masterpiece into a masterpiece of crap. They cut some scenes out because they thought they were too disturbing or long, added more repetition, gave Tack the inappropriate voice of Matthew Broderick and gave everyone who couldn't talk some annoying thought talk that distracted from the great animation. The thief, voiced by Jonathan Winters, spoke about everything he could see and thought that he was in the real world of the present day by speaking present day references ("Nobody lives like this except college kids.") and pop culture references ("I'm going to Disneyland!"), and he wouldn't shut the hell up. Nor would anyone else. The edit overflowed with dialogue, with tons of grunting voices and more usage of "What?" from King Nod. And that's right; Phido and the alligators could actually thought-talk as well. What, did Jim Davis suddenly take over the production? This isn't a Garfield TV special. What were they thinking? Did they care about the original's creator? It probably inspired the butchery the Weinstein Company did to the film version of The Magic Roundabout when they added cuts, random flatulence jokes, pop culture references and moose dialogue.
0/10 for Arabian Knight.
So the only version of this film to watch is the Recobbled cut. Don't waste your time with the other versions. A true-to-the-story restoration of the film was put on hold when Roy E. Disney left The Walt Disney Company so that the company could be totally butchered, but Garrett Gilchrist hears that the Disney restoration has been continued, so there's hope yet!
0 comments, Reply to this entry
Posted : 5 years, 6 months ago on 17 March 2010 05:50
(A review of 2012
The last four months of 2009 were mostly happy when it comes to movies with ratings below PG-13/12A. Food from the sky, a chance to see two Pixar classics again, a lie to change everything in a world where lies or religion don't exist, lots of happy romance going on, a magical door that leads to a world beyond your wildest imagination, big friendly creatures playing with a little boy, an anime franchise revival, a last chance to memorise the King of Pop, a famous Christmas tale being awesome-fied, woodland creatures having fun, a friendly retro planet getting discovered and two royals/frogs keeping a currently-disrespected company alive.
And then we got 2012.
There have been many mentionings of the world ending last year. Terminator Salvation was post-apocalyptic, the Sun was the main target of destruction (WTF) in Transformers: Revenge of the Perverts, the machines and Stitch Punks in 9 were the world's only inhabitants after the attack, the Surrogates almost caused an end to all humanity, Ricky Gervais lied in one scene about the world ending in The Invention of Lying and there was something to do with the world ending in the upcoming Sherlock Holmes. But this disaster settles all of that. And boy, is it a disaster.
2012 friggin' sucked! It's just some propaganda designed to scare people into believing that the world really will end in late 2012. It's no surprise that this was released on Friday the 13th; it's just the right time to be one of the unlucky ones to see such a horrible movie! My predictions for this movie's suckage were obviously correct; I created pictures and videos about how bad it will be, and I even did some of the paragraphs in this review days before I had the chance to finally post it! Damn you, Emmerich! Why did you have to make a crappy movie so visually spectacular?! Besides, the idea isn't the only thing about this movie that made me laugh. That's right, it's also a comedy by mistake. I expected the reviews for this film to be horrible, but they weren't the worst! It appears that some critics loved its campiness and found it to be a guilty pleasure. Even Roger Ebert loved it! But that's what you'd expect from the guy who preferred the third Mummy film to the recent Star Trek. According to The Independent, at the end of the special screening of this movie, everyone applauded. Or did they? Well, the Sony twats added a recorded sound effect of an applause and lied that the applause was real, when all the people just walked out and only used their hands to get themselves up off of the seat and carry their belongings! What is the world coming to?
In this movie, the Mayan calendar proves that 11:11 AM (where?), December 21st, 2012, the year of the London Olympics, the movie version of Marvel's The Avengers and the 200th anniversary of the 1812 Overture, will be the beginning of the world's apocalypse, and it's obvious why no-one's celebrating Christmas. And guess what? In real life, the Mayans said that the world will come to an end of a cycle, not come to an end, period! I'm guessing that someone was lost in translation. In the beginning, it shows evidence during 2009 to 2012. The first two bits of damage when 2012 comes are a huge crack and a random car explosion. We don't see why - maybe it was a bomb. If this movie could be any more screwed up, it'd be an invisible terrorist. They even mention a mass suicide because of the prediction -- does Roland want that to happen to everyone? Now every movie has to have main characters, but this is one of those movies where you just have to pick anyone you want. In this film, it's a mock of Barrack Obama played by Danny Glover (there was also a mock of Arnold Schwarzenegger), a scientist played by Chiwetel Ejiofor and John Cusack in a role which pretty much rips off that of Tom Cruise in the remake of The War of the Worlds. Wait, another rip-off? Crap!
Now I don't know if his character Jackson Curtis is really a character, because his importance is for writing a critically bashed book called "Farewell Atlantis". At least this has more character than The Day After Tomorrow. But moving on, awesome special effects destroy America and Curtis' family have to struggle to survive. They go places for research and shelter in different ways of transport; driving, flying, running. On their journey to the modern arks in China, they meet up with a guy who is played by the guy from Zombieland and accidentally shows off his butt crack before his demise, a friend of theirs and a bunch of Russian stereotypes including a guy named Yuri and a member of the family named Sasha. Gee, [Link removed - login to see]">does that sound familiar at all? Later, they join in with a lot more people and a bunch of jungle animals trying to survive to go into the arks while much more random disasters happen, including a destruction of the White House that's more awesome than the laser destruction in Independence Day. How many people will survive? Can this movie get any cheesier? Will the Master of Disaster be able to make another disasterous disaster movie? Well, this is actually his last one. Hallelujah. Imagine if he still made disaster movies - if the buzz about the asteroid XF11 hitting Earth in 2028 carried on and he decided to make a movie about that, I'd wish the asteroid hit me immediately.
The special effects are needless to say kick-ass, but everything else is just suck-ass. I didn't think John Cusack goofed up on his career in Igor! The special effects, though, are just overblown as well and result in complete CGI porn that gives the finger to logic. But if you want real CGI porn, watch the Speed Racer movie! The acting is decent, but sometimes annoying. Every bad movie has cheesiness, and you'd find a lot of that in this movie. The whole thing rips off many action scenes like ones from Deep Impact, even though I haven't seen it yet. And Yuri? He's one of the reasons why this movie made me laugh. He sounds like a Russian Sylvester Stallone! And guess what? The end of the movie isn't the end of the story. For we have long to wait until the grand finale, because Roland Emmerich had thought up a TV series based on this movie that takes place in 2013! And you thought "Back to the Barnyard" was bad enough. Now if you're guessing how long this is, let me give you a hint - I saw 9 and Zombieland on the same day on November 1st. They are each a minute close to 80, one before and the other after. If you watch them on the same day too but stop watching on the last minute of the end credits, guess what length you're going to get?
The marketing was crazy - when I went on the London train to go and see the special preview of Astro Boy, 2012 was advertised on the London IMAX. A poster for the film also had a cameo in Zombieland. No joke. At the cinema I go to there was a poster board so huge that the ones for This Is It, A Christmas Carol, The Princess and the Frog and Sherlock Holmes had to stay behind. I even heard radio advertising for the premiere and saw a poster at the cinema persuading the audience to buy tickets for the film. I saw plenty of viral marketing and promotion for the CGI disaster bonanza, which says the world will end due to something called "Planet X" (*insert Duck Dodgers reference here*), and that marketing was so popular that a lot of people became dumbasses and believed that the apocalypse is real! A Nasa scientist, named David Morrison, got 1,000+ notices from frightened little teenage babies who threatened to commit suicide from viewing 2012's viral websites! They often added a friggin' notice at the end of the trailers and the bottom of the posters to scare the living daylights out of even more people by telling them to find out the "truth" and Google up '2012'! What were they thinking?! It's as if the creators are trying to ask people, "Go see this movie and believe in the apocalypse of 2012 or else you can come and kiss our asses."
Now, 2012 isn't the only end of the world prediction that got a movie. Search on the IMDB for Y2K. And if I had to compare this with The Asylum/Faith Films' 2012 Doomsday, which came out in early 2008, I'd have to say that 2012 Doomsday sucked the most. The acting was terrible, the visual effects were mediocre, the film was short and the dialogue was rubbish. It was way too religious because God was mentioned too many times. 24 times including "Lord", to be exact. It tries so hard to be friendly to Christians, but ends up pleasing Satan. And I bet you know how they say "OMG". That's right, "Oh my Gosh!" If you've ever seen the film Dragonwyck, you'd notice about seven uses of the word 'God' from a young female in the last half, but this is ridiculous! Even the plot is stupid! The main characters are just randomly picked; you wouldn't know who the hell the film is about!
Even the whole thing ends with the gang finding out that birth will keep them safe, and they're lucky because they've brought an abandoned pregnant woman from Mexico with them. So everyone and everything gets burned except the Mayan temple and the characters. This is a highly religious film, yet they didn't have any black people in it! And do you want to know the rest of the ball-sucking? The Asylum recently released another 2012 film as a rip-off of Roland's movie - 2012 Supernova, which doesn't even have much to do with 2012! The character development is worse in that film and it feels like more of a sci-fi action film rip-off, and the whole thing has a happy ending where the world stays alive! It's like a movie where a giant octopus tries to save the Titanic! Which actually happened in a movie! And you wondered why I saw 2012...
There's also a similar movie idea I've heard of by Michael friggin' Bay named 2012: The War for Souls, probably the reason why 2012 Doomsday was created, which hasn't had any recent news because the project was cancelled, praise the Lord. Just imagine, tons of unnecessary gay sex jokes, all the goofiness of Armageddon, everything exploding and burning and an end to the movie where the whole world explodes! That would be pure hell.
Columbia, how could you? Late in 2009 you gave us District 9 (TriStar), Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs, Zombieland and Michael Jackson's This Is It, and now you want to help the director of 10,000 BC try to persuade people into believing that the world is going to end? I want to go up to that Torch Lady, steal her torch and use it burn her face off. If you think we're this fooled, then I'm not seeing any of your movies on the big screen ever again. To anyone reading this, do not trust the advertising. Do not waste your money or a time of your life that's shorter than Avatar and thankfully shorter than Fame. Do not get attracted by the VFX or the end song that's so amazing that it beats that of Titanic or Armageddon. Do not see this movie, unless you enjoy campy eye candy. It's basically a disaster that makes The Twilight Saga: New Moon seem like nothing to worry about! For if you do see it, you're getting a disaster in three meanings; the death of the world, the death of cinema, and the death of your brain cells. I had wasted not only 158 minutes of my life, but 34 precious pounds off of my money, and you won't believe how much I regret doing so. I also got a pain in my backside from sitting for too long, so I had to walk around like a hunchback for a short while! So yeah, it's crap, and I don't give a turd if you enjoyed it or treated it as a tribute to the campy disaster flicks of the past, because I kept my brain inside my head throughout the entire movie. But I have to give the movie some credit for making me laugh by accident and not being so Bay-ish, and I admit that 2012 Doomsday and 2012 Supernova are no 2012.
0 comments, Reply to this entry
Posted : 5 years, 6 months ago on 17 March 2010 05:43
(A review of LEGO Indiana Jones 2. The Adventure Continues
When I saw the trailer for the higher definition versions of this game, I thought it looked fun. People didn't like it as much as the first one because you get to play through Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, the fourth addition which was praised by critics but hated by others because it was being taken too seriously, which surprises me because the Temple of Doom was very goofy. It also got a Razzie for Worst Prequel, Remake, Rip-off or Sequel, winning over Disaster Movie. DISASTER MOVIE. Can you believe that? What I saw in the film was just a mock of how CGI-packed action movies are today (don't get me started on Michael Bay or Roland Emmerich), and how anti-logic, campy and full of plot-holes the sci-fi adventure serials were back in the old days. So it was a guilty pleasure. I added the PSP version of this game to my Christmas list with high expectations and when I got it, I put the UMD into my PSP, started the game and guess what I got? Low-budget suck.
When I played the game, I noticed something different about the menu. The only moving thing was the background, and the text font was Arial-ish. I didn't really bother me that much, and the special opening video was fun to watch even if it seemed to be a bit squashed into the 480×272 size. The life/stud count looked different, but that wasn't the big deal. The graphics on the characters may have been PS3-style, you could change into a different character in Free Play mode and there were some interesting moments of teamwork, but everyone jumped the same way, their abilities weren't there, the music was almost the same, the quality was mediocre, the sound quality was terrible, it was harder to switch characters, the motion was bland, the studs aren't as attracted to you as usual and the controls were lame.
The only level I could get up to was a mini-game where I had to beat the time by rolling on a boulder to collect some things (I forgot what they were; this game is hardly even memorable), and I couldn't win because the controls were slippery as hell! So at that moment I took the game out, sulked, cheered myself up with LittleBigPlanet and waited until I could sell this game on eBay. Where did you go wrong, TT Games? Did you suddenly come up with the idea so late that you just had to rush this one? All PSP games are supposed to be crammed with great quality; this is more of the shabby DS kind. Could you imagine if they made LEGO Star Wars: The Complete Saga for PSP and screwed it all up with cheapness? I felt like I was trying to beat the boss of LEGO Star Wars 2 for the DS.
The PSP version of LEGO Indiana Jones 2 is probably the worst thing to come out of any division of Lucasfilm since the Star Wars Holiday Special. It's worse than Howard the Duck. It's as frustrating as Jar Jar. It's that bad! Okay, so I may not have played the whole damn thing, but this forgets all that could get crammed into the previous LEGO games and botches it all up. Come on, TT, if companies like Sony can make their games equal to the PS2/PS3 standards, so should you! You succeeded with LEGO Star Wars 2, LEGO Indiana Jones 1 and LEGO Batman, but not with this? Let's hope they don't screw up the PSP version of LEGO Harry Potter...
0 comments, Reply to this entry