Change Your Image
Upload An Image
Crop And Save
I'm focusing much more on my lists in recent years than the reviews. So check out those:
My other internet names are Qwerty100, Prtek, Vjetropev and others.
Za one koji traze YU/srpske filmove sa recenzijama na srpskom, evo ove liste.
ListsAn error has ocurred. Please try again
Stvaranje filma nije kao pisanje par pesmica za neki shalabajz domaci album, ni blizu. Za jedan (dobar) film je realno potrebna pozamasna svota novca, a na Balkanu toga vrlo retko ima na raspologanju. Ovde krimosi, kako politicki tako i oni sa kajlama, drze svu lovu, a dobri filmovi takve specije ne zanimaju. Filmove je tesko finansirati na Zapadu, a kamoli kod nas. Kod nas je, primera radi, dug niz godina bio standard da se skoro nikada ne snimaju scene vise od jednom zbog skupoce filmskog materijala - sto naravno drasticno koci i rezisera i glumce u teznji ka savrsenstvu (kada takva teznja uopste postoji). Vec taj podatak u vecoj meri objasnjava zasto domaci filmovi nisu na visokom nivou cesto - a da ne govorimo o tome da je decenijama Tiletova Komunjar-Partija uglavnom trazila samo propagandne, anti-cetnicke, pro-komunjarske filmove odnosno sam kvalitet cesto nije bio na vrhu prioriteta mnogih rezisera vec samo da shire neku debilnu politicku ideologiju zarad love, karijere i napretka u toj Komunjar-Partiji. Ne treba potcenjivati broj onih koji su dosli do vecih uloga ili reziserskih projekata samo zbog slihtanja Komunjar- Partiji.
Jos jedan veliki problem domaceg filma - pogotovo u poslednjih par godina - je naravno rastuci nepotizam. Tesko je ocekivati jaku kinematografiju kada reziseri i producenti (koji su cesto i sami izgradili svoje karijere preko rodbinske/politicke veze) angazuju skoro iskljucivo decu prijatelja, njihovu i svoju rodbinu, i/ili neku (mahom netalentovanu) decu politickih elitista. Pravim audicijama se retko ko bavi vise; ali ko aktivno ne trazi mlade talente nece ih verovatno ni naci. Odnosno ako trazis perspektivne mlade pisce i glumce iskljucivo medju decom svojih kolega, ti onda sebi - a ujedno i srpskom filmu - ogranicavas potencijal drasticno, jer sa osrednjom ili cak totalno netalentovanom decom nekih tamo kosarkasa, partijaca, scenarista i glumaca ne mozes da ocekujes stvaranje filmskih klasika. Od g**ana se pita ne pravi. Pogotovo ne kod komedija koje zahtevaju pravi talenat a ne banalno kreveljenje neukih laika.
Ali je vise nego ocigledno da trenutno u Srbiji obicna deca iz naroda (tj. bez rodjaka u svetu filma) slabo koga zanima u nasoj licemernoj filmskoj "eliti" koja se samo folira kako sve rade "zarad umetnosti" a ne zbog svog dzepa i slave. Ko zna koliko glumackih i scenaristickih talenata sedi neiskorisceno po citavoj zemlji jer etablirana incestoidno-klanovska garda smatra da su samo njihova deca predodredjena za film, tj. da su genetski nasledila sav njihov talent - sto je naravno budalastina u koju mogu da poveruju samo veoma naivni i povodljivi ljudi (koji nazalost cine vecinu na Balkanu). S jedne strane laprdaju u intervjuima do besvesti pretenciozno kako je njima (tj. rediteljima i glumcima) glavni cilj "stvaranje umetnosti" - a ovamo gledaju uvek da uguraju neke svoje pajtose i rodbinu (cak i one najnekompetentnije) u glavne uloge i kao pisce sto znaci da ih NE zanima umetnost, bar ne kao primarni cilj u toku stvaranja filmova.
Cast izuzetcima, naravno, jer su se neki glumci ciji su roditelji iz tog miljea stvarno pokazali, ali to je sitna manjina. Niti ja sugerisem da je nepotisticki podmladak u Srbiji neka razmazena i obesna bagra kao u Holivudu, jer kod nas glumci uglavnom zaradjuju relativno skromno, znaci mnogi od njih stvarno idu u taj biznis jer to vole a ne da se obogate. Mada, taj bedni motiv zvani SLAVA je i dalje cesto glavni pokretac takvih ljudi.
To sto gotovo nikome u Srbiji vise ni ne smeta sto je nepotizam toliko zavladao medijskim profesijama (guglirajte nepotizam u srpskom filmu, necete naci nijedan clanak na ovu temu - sem ovog - iako je nepotizam sve-prisutan) govori koliko se nas narod navikao na korupciju i dekadenciju kao NORMALAN nacin zivota. A nepotizam je ogranak korupcije, i to jedan od najstetnijih, po sve nas. Ne postoje dzaba zakoni u izvesnim "trulim" zemljama koji sluze da se nepotizam sprecava ili barem drzi u granicama normale.
Kad se sve ovo uzme u obzir, ne moze i ne sme da cudi da nema mnogo odlicnih domacih filmova, jer je u tako koruptnoj (anti-)stvaralackoj atmosferi pa jos uz manjak love tesko proizvesti nesto kvalitetno. Dobri filmovi ne padaju s neba, cak ni kada je u pitanju nebeski narod. (Ili pogotovo ne tada.)
S druge strane, YU filmovi (i dobri i losi) imaju neku specificnu atmosferu koja se ne moze naci kod stranih filmova. (Ovo vazi pretezno za starije filmove.) Ja ne mogu ni da zamislim kako oni deluju stranim, a pogotovo zapadnim gledaocima; verovatno bizarno i zbunjujuce. Bez obzira na sve prepreke, i finansijske i stvaralacke prirode, Jugoslavija je uspela da proizvede izvestan broj dobrih filmova - a za to su uglavnom zasluzni odlicni YU glumci, a mnogo manje scenaristi koji se ne mogu pohvaliti velikim ucinkom; malo njih se istaklo na nekom visem nivou.
Karl Malden je jednom rekao da je glavni problem Balkanskog filma nizak nivo scenarija. Pavle Vuisic je, po prici njegove udovice, skoro svaki scenario koji je dobio prelistao na brzaka i bacio s gadjenjem, a onda napravio neki komentar u fazonu "opet neko sranje". Da je pisanje bilo na nivou glume, Jugoslavija bi imala daleko bolji ucinak. Nemamo dobre scenariste - surova istina. Ili im ne dozvoljavamo da dodju do izrazaja zbog pomenute korupcije kompletnog sistema i drustva.
FILMOVI SU RANGIRANI PO KVALITETU, od najboljih pa sve do onih ocajnih, kojih ima poprilicno.
OCENE: Domaci korisnici ovog sajta, kao i mnogi strani, imaju tendenciju da daju maksimalne ocene filmovima koji im se svidjaju. Ali ja 10/10 ne dajem za dobre filmove vec za genijalne filmove. To i objasnjava delom zasto toliko domacih filmova ima nesrazmerno vise proseke od npr. americkih filmova. Ja ocenjujem drugacije od vecine korisnika sa Balkana:
10 - skoro savrsen film ili savrseno zabavan 9 - ispunjava sva ocekivanja 8 - odlican 7 - veoma dobar 6 - dobar, solidan 5 - OK, nije los, moze da prodje 4 - mediokritet, manje-vise gledljiv, ali felerican 3 - los film 2 - uzasan film 1 - Ceca Raznatovic
Inace, evo vam mali savet kako da dodjete do objektivnijih ocena za domace filmove, ali i filmove uopste, na ovom sajtu. Kada ste na strani nekog filma, idite na statistiku odnosno demografsku podelu glasaca, pa vidite koji je prosek dat od "top 1000 voters". Ta ocena je bliza objektivnoj prosecnoj oceni nego kada racunamo sve glasove, jer ti ljudi su gledali daleko vise filmova te imaju jace kriterijume.
VASI KOMENTARI: Posto je IMDb odlucio da se samo preko Facebook-a moze komentarisati, onemogucio sam ovu opciju. A posto je IMDb izbrisao i opciju privatnih poruka izmedju usera, nemate nikakvog nacina da se meni obratite sa kritikama, pohvalama ili bljuvanjem. Ne ljutite se na mene, vec se obratite ljudima nadleznim za ovaj sajt. Posto se sloboda govora sve vise tamani na internetu (kao i u medijima), necu da ja budem nista gori odnosno bolji od njih, te vam vise ne dajem sansu da komentarisete, jer je FB jedina opcija (a pre nekoliko godina je mogao svako aninimno da ostavlja komentare), a ja FB nalog nemam niti mi treba, a jos manje ce neko da izvrsi pritisak na mene da ga otvorim.
Mislim da je sramota sto velika vecina domacih filmova nemaju plakate (tj. slike) ubacene na ovaj sajt, i da je prilicno jadno sto su biografije domacih glumaca tako oskudne a ponekad i nepostojece. Uopste receno, na internetu ne mozes doci do nekih bitnijih i/ili detaljnijih podataka ni o domacim filmovima ni o glumcima. Eto koliko Srbi cene svoju kulturu. Vole da masu zastavama i da vicu "SRBIJA!" ali kada treba nesto konkretno da urade za svoju zemlju (ili u vezi nje) nema ih ni od korova.
Sto se tice "plot summaries" domacih filmova na IMDb, mahom su lose napisani, odnosno na losem engleskom sa puno gramatickih gresaka i sa konfuznim, jadno prevedenim frazama. Pa ne moze sa Google Translate da se odradi dobar tekst. Dobrovoljno se javljam da ih ispravljam.
Izgleda da kritika utice! Jer u medjuvremenu su postavljene slike za velik broj domacih filmova. Kada sam zapoceo listu, svaki deseti film je imao fotografiju plakata ili bilo kakvu fotku, a sada je to ucestala pojava.
Dnevnik masinovodje 9/10 Stado 7/10 Sizif K 1/10 Tamarin Izostanak (nije ubacen na listu jer sajt zeza) 2/10 Ime: Dobrica, prezime: nepoznato 3/10 Sve nase nesto tako 1/10 Mali svet 8/10 Belo odelo 5/10 Tesna Koza 2 3/10 Tesna Koza 3 4/10 Tesna Koza 4 3/10 Crni Bombarder 4/10 Vidim ti ladju na kraju puta 8/10 Rode u magli 8/10 Jesen stize, dunjo moja 2/10 Neko me ipak ceka 3/10 Lajanje na zvezde 3/10 Tegla puna vazduha 2/10 Carlston za Ognjenku 4/10 Pejzazi u magli 3/10 Sivi kamion crvene boje 5/10 Pored mene 4/10 Rat uzivo 6/10 Nije kraj 8/10 Pljacka treceg rajha 5/10 Hiljadarka 6/10 Inkarnacija 4/10 Nebeska udica 6/10 Mamaros 7/10 Bokseri idu u raj 6/10 Balkanska pravila 3/10 Tamo i ovde 6/10 Karaula 6/10 Falsifikator 8/10 Zena sa slomljenim nosem 4/10 Tri Ane 4/10
WARNING: This list is full of spoilers. Not just my comments are filled with them, but the synopsis of most episodes contains spoilers to some degree.
If I were to make a list of all the celebs that are liberal/left-wing/Marxist, it would be a mission of a lifetime, something I haven't got time for. The IMDb computers would probably all explode, in a spectacular chain reaction, for lack of capacity to handle so much data.
So I thought it'd be much easier to point towards those celebs that aren't liberal.
The term "non-liberal" means just that, people who aren't liberal. This does not mean that all the people listed here are right-wing or share the same views, or that they're all hardcore anti-Leftists or anything like that. After all, the Right wing of the political spectrum is far more varied than the mostly uniform and one-dimensional Left. Besides which, there is a certain thing call "Center". Quite a few centrists are listed.
This list is by no means intended to serve as a mindless glorification of the individuals on it. There are people here whose views by-and-large do not correspond with mine.
Nevertheless, even though celebrity glorification is a hobby that lacks any merit and isn't something I ever encourage, one has to give the individuals on this list at least some credit, especially since certain actors and directors here have been victims of "Red-Listing". It takes courage to go against the grain in Hollywood - especially politically.
"Red-Listing", i.e. blackballing, involves making life difficult for those who do not subscribe to the Left's dogmatic and fierce political correctness; it includes career-hindering and such.
The names are listed in no particular order.
COMMENTS: The comments section changes introduced several years ago have basically ruined what used to be a fun interaction between list-maker and reader, hence I will be disabling comments on nearly all of my lists. (I said nearly: you're free to spend an hour perusing my other lists to find one that does allow comments.) So if you want to let me know what you think, PM me.
Oh no, wait. They've disabled PMs. So I guess there is no way you can share your views of my lists and reviews with me. That's called "progress".
Or you can go to Vjetropev's blog and find me there.
Or go to my new YouTube channel, it's mostly music-related:
Since WW2, the success of Capitalism in the West has had Western Marxists fuming and foaming at the mouth. How does one fight against something that works - especially when one's own (alternative) ideology has been proven time and time again to be an utter failure? Marxists tried taking concrete physical action by taking their misguided cause to the streets in the late 60s, but it didn't work; aside from a few Soviet-influenced Leftist college professors and a bunch of bored/gullible students, the masses pretty much did NOT want a Red Revolution - in the slightest. There has been an ongoing, persistent and dirty propaganda campaign by all left-wing elements to discredit Capitalism (hence democracy) in every way imaginable. Nit-picking through its flaws (because Capitalism isn't perfect) - plus making up blatant lies about it: these are the basic methods used.
Marxists realized that the only way to fight something that works in practice is to smear it in theory - or fantasy, in this case: on the big and small screen. Film and television offer the best platforms for disseminating nonsense and fallacies: you simply make a claim, without having to prove it. A perfect vehicle for anyone whose sole aim is to mislead. Western Marxists will NEVER be appeased until they help bring about the fall of Capitalism and democracy. They are on a mission. It's up to us viewers whether or not this decadent propagandist machine, fueled by sociopaths, quasi-intellectuals and other misanthropes, will eventually bring about this long-awaited negative change and instability - two things Marxists long for with all their hearts. Economic downfall comes right after moral disintegration and all-encompassing dumbing-down, two more elements Marxists work at ceaselessly. The goal? Destroy the Capitalist/democratic West from within, and then take over once there is economic chaos i.e. when there is a fertile ground for political extremism.
And then? Establish a hardcore dictatorship in which a selected elite of psychopaths will walk all over millions in order to expand their own wealth - under the guise of "creating a new man". Btw, this laughable notion of creating "a new man", i.e. this hopeless undertaking of making gigantic artificial evolutionary leaps, is pretty much what the Nazis had envisioned as well. Just one of many parallels between National-Socialism and Marxism, i.e. one of many similarities between the two extremes which Western left-wing propaganda prefers to keep quiet about - with good reason.
Just to avoid any misunderstandings, the list includes blatant propaganda films disguised as "objective" documentaries i.e. fiction pieces, but it also includes "harmless" entertainment flicks that hadn't been made with the sole and expressed purpose of promoting Leftist ideology, but into which the filmmakers threw in more hidden i.e. less obvious messages and occasional jabs at the Right (and I don't mean the extreme Right).
What the vast majority of Western left-wing propaganda film-makers fail to realize is that even when they have some valid points to make (which is admittedly rare), they make it very difficult for any intelligent or sane viewer to take them seriously because they overload their films with excessive bias and utter nonsense. They use anti-logic, fact-twisting, misquoting, half-truths, manipulative editing, music as over-dramatization, and other simple propaganda tools that make their films the useless sources of information they are.
It's called overkill, and when you exaggerate too much you end up achieving very little. Too greedy. Most of the "documentaries" listed here are so heavily biased that they fail on almost every level (except in exposing the film-maker's ignorance and dishonest intentions), even when their criticism is valid (which, again, is rarely the case).
I welcome all suggestions and criticism. If you are a liberal and feel you must label me a "Fascist" just because I don't share your views, it's your choice. But keep in mind that I have omitted all movies whose primary focus is sending a clear anti-Nazi message, such as "Blood In The Face", even when they were made by Marxist directors. If you can convince me that a movie or TV series is here by mistake, I will remove it.
Any movies you find missing here you will quite likely find on my other propaganda list, Part II.
The list consists largely of blatant propaganda "documentaries" and obvious Leftist thrillers/dramas. But also included are flicks that aren't overtly political yet contain little jabs at the Right i.e. sneaky little left-wing messages.
Again: left-wing propaganda is just a rumour. Perhaps I'm TOTALLY wrong, and it's just a figment in our collective imagination. Might even be mass hysteria, this naive notion that Hollywood is a den of Communist/left-wing vipers. Perhaps all these films are Right-wing.
COMMENTS: The comments section changes introduced several years ago have basically ruined what used to be a fun interaction between list-maker and reader, hence I will be disabling comments on nearly all of my lists. (I said nearly: you're free to spend an hour perusing my other lists to find one that does allow comments.) So if you want to let me know what you think, PM me.
Oh no, wait. They've disabled PMs. So I guess there is no way you can share your views of my lists and reviews with me. That's called "progress".
U Srbiji je razlika izmedju levice i desnice cesto nepostojeca ili barem nejasna, jer u srpskoj politici oduvek vlada cist oportunizam a ne ideologija. Kradomanija kao cilj, a lazna ideologija kao paravan za kriminalne delatnosti - uglavnom bazirana na nacionalizmu. Jer u Srbiji su velika vecina "politickih stranaka" zapravo mafijaska udruzenja koja funkcionisu vise kao sekte nego kao politicke organizacije. Zato neke od ovde pomenutih stranaka mogu da se vide i kao jedno i kao drugo, i levica i desnica. Ili ni jedno ni drugo, jer mafija nema politicku obojenost. Uostalom, SPS je tokom 90ih bila kvazi-socijalisticka stranka koja je prevashodno koristila nacionalizam da debilizuje masu, sto znaci da su bili bukvalno nacional-socijalisti odnosno Nacisti.
Za razliku od zombificiranih i veoma licemernih holivudskih glumaca od kojih velika vecina podrzava onu najgoru politicku opciju u svojoj zemlji (citaj: komuniste kamuflirane u naizgled nevino ruho "Demokrata" tj "liberala"), velika vecina domacih glumaca podrzavaju umerene stranke odnosno generalno "normalne"/normalnije politicke opcije. Ova lista prikazuje one kojima su demokratija i interesi drzavljana Srbije daleko manje bitni od licnih interesa ili cak totalno nebitni, kao i one koji mozda nisu imali lose namere ali su zastranili zbog naivnosti ili manjka inteligencije. (Mada, ova druga varijanta slabo pije vodu, ipak je ova prva najverovatnije dominantan faktor.) Ovo su znaci izuzetci, zato je lista i tako kratka.
Neki od njih su se priklanjali takvim strankama iz ubedjenja, neki iz cistog interesa. Prosudite sami ko je sta.
Hey, I'm a whistle-blower of sorts! Why won't Hollywood side with me as they do with Edward Snowden?
Oh right, I'm blowing the whistle on THEM. They don't appreciate it when THEY'RE being scrutinized. They prefer to do the moralizing and the finger-pointing themselves, especially in their brazenly deceptive political propaganda films, while always hoping that not too many people notice what a cesspool of hypocrisy, egomania and decadence the American film industry itself is.
(And besides, Snowden is a bad example. There is a big difference between a whistle-blower and a spy.)
First off, let me explain why this list aggravates some people within show business: because it exposes the hypocrisy of their elitism which goes against all of their left-wing, "equal-opportunity" public-persona politics. The main reason the list annoys some movie fans: because it reveals to them how easily they're manipulated into devouring anything - or accepting anybody as a "talent" - that the powerful movie-industry hype-machine forces into their defenseless brains. Nobody wants to be informed that they are uncritical and lacking criteria. Nobody likes to find out that they aren't capable of differentiating between a great actor and a mediocre one. (But it's precisely this widespread - and growing - inability among most movie-goers that enables nepotism to flourish more than ever before.)
The list that proves that practically anyone can be turned into a star, or at least a moderately employed actor. If you can talk, walk and learn lines, you're in. But you do need connections, because the Pearly Gates of Hollywood are holding off hordes of incoming potential actors, writers and directors whose unexplored talents will remain forever hidden thanks to favouritism. Thanks to nepotism (and other forms of Hollywood corruption that I won't get into here but which you can easily guess) these gates are firmly shut most of the time. At least for the "plebs".
The movie industry - everywhere, not just in the States - is a very incestuous, sect-like world in which family connections, political affiliation - and even ethnicity - are major factors when it comes to the forging of careers. Talent is far behind in 10th place: nobody seems to be interested in it anymore, certainly not studio bosses and producers. And that is a big part of the reason why at least 90% of all movies are pretty much useless.
Which brings me to why (American) movies have been going down the toilet in recent years. The amount of garbage being put out by major studios has been on a steady rise for some years now. There are several reasons for this, but perhaps the most negative impact stems from the exponentially growing nepotism. It is difficult to find a recent movie in which more than a half of the cast members didn't have influential parents/relatives/friends in the industry before they got their foot in the movie door. (Ditto the film crews).
The list focuses almost solely on actors and directors - hence it doesn't even take into consideration the vast number of bad scripts that have been a result of nepotistic infiltration! Nor does it include the plethora of nepotistic offspring that had appeared only in several smaller roles in fairly meaningless productions. You can click on the bio of just about any better-known actor older than 45 and you'll find that at least half of them have kids who are either actors, producers, or working in film crews as set designers or whatever. So movie "art" is now an arena limited to a predetermined genetic karma, to a select few with the "right breeding", huh? Nice. How monarchistic. How anti-socialist.
Tinseltown's elitist jet-set would have us believe that acting "talent" is passed on genetically, but if you believe there is such a thing as an acting gene (or a "charisma DNA") I would like to see some scientific proof of it first. Besides, many nepotists on this list come from non-movie, or at least non-acting, backgrounds. Furthermore, MANY of the kids who got a shot at fame in the past few decades - that aren't related to actors or producers - are children of upper-class, millionaire clans, wealthy industrialists for example, a fact that offers more proof how anti-equal-opportunity the film industry is.
They would also have us believe that nearly all of the world's acting talent has already been collected from all corners of America, that the world's "acting talent pool" has dried up, been totally depleted, so why even bother looking for potential new De Niros and Pacinos amongst the "masses"? Hence the debilitating current trend whereby the vast majority of the younger stars today have parents in powerful positions in the business - or commerce, or politics. I wouldn't mind, IF these kids were any good. But they usually aren't. Armies of Pauly Shores and Casey Afflecks and Amy Schumers dominate Hollywood, while much more talented kids are sitting around stupidly, naively waiting for their agents to cast them in good auditions. So anti-socialist.
It would seem that auditions serve very little purpose in Hollywood (and elsewhere), except to weed out the worst from the bad. A typical high-profile Hollywood audition must be like a who's-who of famous actors' children, all fighting for a shot at fame and additional cash. It makes one wonder just how many truly bad nepotists never make it! Even a severely talent-free case like David Arquette must have beaten out several dozen failed nepotists, i.e. they might be even worse ones than him. Scary (but fascinating) thought.
The list also exposes the startling hypocrisy of the movie business which is predominantly left-wing (now more than ever before), i.e. supposedly orientated toward the rights of the poor and "oppressed" - and yet there's this little anti-equality thing called elitist nepotism that proves that this is just an act: in reality, no poor or unconnected person with talent can make it in Hollywood unless they have wild luck. Hollywood predominantly employs its own spoiled rich kids, plus a whole array of sons and daughters of powerful politicians, famous pop stars, and high-profile athletes. It rarely hires middle-class or especially blue-collar talent. Again, I wouldn't mind this at all, IF only this corrupt selection-process worked - but it clearly doesn't.
So what is the real message Hollywood is giving blue-collar kids with dreams of movie careers? "You go on working in your factories and washing dishes and flipping burgers like your parents, we don't really need you here." That is the real message here, and one that is in total contrast/opposition to Hollywood's left-wing equal-opportunity baloney - the politically-correct and completely dishonest message Hollywood is selling to the brainwashed masses.
So, yes, as insane and as despicable as it may sound, Hollywood is about silver-spoon-fed, righteous, holier-than-thou millionaires creating and starring in movies that preach about the rights of the oppressed, the poor, promoting socialism, minorities and the working class. Makes a lot of sense, doesn't it. This fact alone should tell you what kind of people run the film industry.
(It's interesting how this list had close to 500 views per week in its first year - then suddenly the numbers went down to two digits. I wonder how that happened.)
The list will be continually upgraded, there are LITERALLY HUNDREDS MORE people that haven't yet been added. Listed in the order from worst to slightly less bad.
And no, I am not a disgruntled actor or director. I have never had any aspirations whatsoever to be in show-biz, since I am neither an exhibitionist attention-seeker nor obsessed with money. All I want is to watch good movies, but that is only possible when a good script is complemented with a good cast, and directed by someone chosen on the merit of his talents, not as a favour for a friend.
Nepotism is a branch of corruption. It is amoral, and it leads to a lowering of artistic standards. Whoever can't grasp this simple concept should skip this list altogether.
And if you do decide to skip it, or if you don't, check out my new YouTube channel, it's mostly music-related and very silly:
I would like to dedicate the list to those 3 people who urged me to make it, but also to the 188 who begged me not to.
All 191 of you were an inspiration. Thank you.
I've picked those 100 from the 3,500+ films I've seen so far. It's a mixed bag, as you'll see. The list is neither dominated by pretentious/meaningless/pointless/dull "surrealist" Euro-crap nor is it entirely made up of commercial mainstream stuff. Me not being either a film-student nor a film critic means that this list could actually be of some use to you.
Zar je moguce da nijedna ovakva lista ne postoji na internetu na ovu temu? Zar sve moram ja uvek da radim?! A opet, sta se cudim; kod nas je korupcija postala toliko normalna pojava da retko ko nepotizam uopste dozivljava kao nesto lose, nesto karcinogeno. A od mene dobijate, po obicaju, novinarstvo i izvestavanje na najvisem nivou. (Nisam "pravi" novinar, ali sam i kao takav - tj amater - daleko bolji novinar od danasnjih kvazi-novinara koji lupetaraju i lazu po raznim publikacijama i sajtovima, jer su ili placeni da lazu, ili lupetaju iz cistokrvnog genetskog idiotizma. Doduse, ovo i nije neki podvig s moje strane jer biti bolji od dunstera nije razlog za samo-hvalospev.)
Osim uvoda koji sledi, jos jedan opsirni uvod za ovu listu mozete naci na internacionalnoj verziji ove liste - Holivudski Nepotisti:
Na engleskom je, ali na tom linku imate jos jedno detaljno objasnjenje mojih razloga i stavova vezanih za ovu temu. Mada i na ovoj listi u pojedinacnim komentarima mozete da nadjete srz svih mojih argumenata.
U Srbiji je javna tajna da se skoro sva zaposljavanja obavljaju ne preko konkursa za posao (konkursi? zaista smesno) vec preko veze iza zatvorenih vrata. Prema tome, sasvim je logicno da se ovako zaposljava i u domenu "sedme umetnosti", i to u mnogo vecoj meri nego sto je to slucaj na primer u Velikoj Britaniji ili Holivnjudu. Mi smo zaista svetski rekorderi u filmskom nepotizmu (odmah iza Bolivuda, oni su jos gori), jer iako ova lista pokriva samo deo svih domacih "vezista" samo je za dve trecine manja od moje internacionalne verzije.
Odlucio sam da se fokusiram iskljucivo na glumce, rezisere i scenariste, odnosno samo na kreativne aspekte filma. Jer koga zanima ako neko ubaci clana porodica da obavlja fizicke poslove i slicno na snimanju; nebitno. Ova srpska lista "vezista" je tek u zacetku, za razliku od mnogo detaljnije i starije holivudske liste, znaci ima sigurno jos puno vise njih koje treba da ovde dodam. Ovo su samo nepotisti za koje znam, odnosno glumci/reziseri/scenaristi za koje postoje informacije na internetu kako su se domogli do svojih (ne)zasluzenih karijera. Ko zna koliko ih jos ima za koje nema nikakvih podataka, a posto ja nemam nikakve licne kontakte ni sa kim iz srpskog filma/pozorista, imam samo internet i ostale medije kao (mrsavi) izvor informacija.
VAZNO: Imajte takodje na umu da ova lista ne uzima u obzir silne karijere koje su zapocete na sledece slicno dubiozne nacine:
- suprug daje supruzi karijeru i obrnuto
- mlada zena ili muskarac spava sa producentom/reziserom/glumcem ili nastavnikom/nastavnicom glume i na taj nacin dolazi do tako kljucne prve uloge
- reditelj/producent nudi prvu ulogu svojoj ljubavnici starleti
- politicki odnosno partijski kontakti (medjutim, ubacio sam neke primere kada partijci i uticajni rezimci ubace svoju decu u svet filma)
- NOB-ovske karijere, od kojih ima citava plejada
- glumac daje karijeru prijatelju iz detinjstva
Jer da sve ovo sracunamo zajedno, lista bi bila pet puta duza, u najmanju ruku. Znaci, ja ovde pokrivam samo onaj klasicni nepotizam - pa sam opet nasao tonu primera. I, naravno, fali na listi jos gomila nepotista za koje nema informacija u medijima vezano za uticajnu rodbinu. (Oni su se "nekaznjeno" izvukli te njihova sramota ostaje tajna - ukoliko spadaju u onu netalentovanu ili malotalentovanu vecinu.) A sve ove tacke nedvosmisleno ukazuju na to da sami "umetnici" tu svoju "sedmu umetnost" cesto ne tretiraju uopste kao umetnost vec samo kao nacin da se obogate odnosno nekako ovajde. Ovakvo ponasanje objasnjava u velikoj meri zasto ima toliko losih filmova, serija, scenarista, rezisera - a pogotovo osrednjih i cak losih glumaca. Jer od G se pita ne pravi.
Nije nikakva tajna da se na FDU danas prakticno ne mozes upisati bez debele veze. To znaju cak i mnogi ljudi koji se ne zanimaju preterano za filmove i pozoriste, a i vrapci. I ranije je bilo jako tesko bez veze, a sada skoro nemoguce. Razlozi za to su prvenstveno mnogo veci broj vec postojecih glumackih klanova nego pre 50 godina - sto znaci velika navala klinaca koji ne mogu da padnu prijemne - i to sto korupcija uopsteno gledano stalno raste u Srbiji. (Raste kao rezultat opsteg pada morala, kako u Srbiji tako i u svetu, ali to je vec neka druga tema.) A od ovih koji se upisu i zavrse taj faks, veoma malo njih izgradi iole ozbiljnu karijeru jer interes za pozoriste i film padaju, kako od vlasti tako i od raje, a time i finansiranje projekata postaje jos veci problem. Znaci, za upis su potrebne veze, a onda je opet veza neophodna i za karijeru nakon zavrsene skole. Na zalost, to u prevodu znaci da se ne vrsi odabir NAJBOLJIH i najsposobnijih u Srbiji, vec onih sa najdebljim vezama, odnosno prednost se daje politickim, klanovskim i rodbinskim elitama. Jasno je da takav truli sistem ne moze da vodi do mnogo kvalitetnih kadrova, a time ni do dobrih filmova.
Nepotizam najjace zaudara u svetu glume, i to mislim prevashodno u modernoj eri srpskog filma: nikada srpski glumci nisu bili gori (u proseku) nego kao u zadnjih 15-ak godina. Scenariji (koji su bili dosta losi u doba YU) su se drasticno popravili, rezija je takodje donekle poboljsana (zbog moderne tehnologije koja je bolja i jeftinija), ali je zato nivo glume dosta propao (cast izuzetcima), i to u velikoj meri zbog neharizmaticnih nepotista koji nemaju "star quality", a time urnisu mnoge filmove sa potencijalom.
Glavni razlog zasto ovaj nedavni pad u kvalitetu glume ne smeta preterano narodu je jednostavan: ljudi ga ni ne primecuju. Toliko su standardi i kriterijumi opali u zadnjih nekoliko decenija (samo pogledajte popularnost "Kursadzija" i slicnog djubreta), sto se skoro svih oblasti umetnosti tice, da retko ko uopste ima mozdani kapacitet da konstatuje kada posmatra losu glumu, bilo da je to u pozoristu, na filmu ili u nekoj seriji. Uostalom, ako se narodu moze s lakocom prodavati turbo-folk u toliko sablasnim kolicinama, zasto im se ne bi proturali pod nos i losi nepotisticki glumci? Sve je to jos i te kako povezano. Dumbing-down. Idiokratija. Nova era je pred nama, i sve ce biti samo ne blistava.
REAKCIJE NEPOTISTA: Ne ocekujem ni trunku razumevanja od ljudi sa ove liste, ako slucajno neko od njih naidje na nju i vidi sebe. Oni su "profiteri" koruptnog sistema koji vlada ne samo u srpskoj glumi vec svugde na svetu (ali ovde mnogo vise), tako da od njih ne ocekujem da mogu objektivno da sagledaju sebe, citavu tematiku i kakav je njihov udeo u svemu. Naravno, ovo ne vazi za onaj manji broj ljudi na listi koji valjaju; oni se valjda nece ljutiti. Ali meni uopste nije svrha liste da ikoga naljutim, vec samo da ukazem na jedan aspekt srpske korupcije i kako ona utice na (ne)kulturu.
REDOSLED: Lista pocinje od najgorih nepotista. Doduse, ovi koji su bez mojih komentara su manje-vise nasumicno rasejani po listi dok ih ne budem negde gledao odnosno procenio koliko su dobri ili (sto je mnogo verovatnije) losi. Znaci, oni najslabiji su na pocetku, a oni retki dobri ili cak odlicni su na kraju liste: na drugoj strani. (Da, neki od vas zaborave da kliknete na nastavak liste, posle 100. mesta.)
KRATKA FUS-NOTA O YU ROKU: Oduvek mi je takozvana "zlatna era" balkanskog roka (70te i 80te) bila smesna, iako sam odrastao u Srbiji, i to kao adolescent bas u tim "bajnim" 80im. (Sarkazam je rezervisan samo za YU-rok, ne za 80te u globalu.) Ja tu gotovo nista od visokog kvaliteta ne cujem. Plitke decije pesmice sa uglavnom mediokritetnim vokalima i osrednjom produkcijom. Nekad sam mislio da je to zato sto su ovi narodi jednostavno muzicki netalentovani, ali u skorije vreme sam otkrio da su se gotovo svi iz te scene probili preko politicke veze. Naime, velik broj nasih rok "velikana" (well... malisana) su bili deca vojnih lica, visokih KPJ funkcionera, urednika novina i slicno. Drugim recima, privilegovana CRVENA BURZOAZIJA. U to "drevno doba" nabavka instrumenata nije bila nimalo laka, a nastupi su mogli ici samo preko omladinskih organizacija kojim je upravljao rezim. Sve je bilo kontrolisano. Obicna - talentovana - deca nisu imala skoro nikakve resorse, nikakve izglede da izgrade karijere u rok muzici, to su bili retki izuzetci. S obzirom koliko je bila sitna ta crvena elitna klasa, pravo je cudo da YU rok nije jos gori bio!
Ali eto, ukoliko se sa mnom slazete da je YU rok izvikan i slab, dao sam vam sada objasnjenje zasto su te grupe bile toliko prosecne i dosadne. Ukoliko (ni)ste toliko primitivni da slusate samo domacu muziku, idite na ovaj link da cujete pravu muziku svetskog ranga. Moje nametanje svog ukusa u muzici na druge, to cete naci na YouTube-u:
Moje recenzije domacih filmova (na srpskom):
Moje recenzije stranih i domacih filmova (na engleskom):
The order is VERY DELIBERATE, which means that the difference between the top 10 and the last 10 is substantial, i.e. the list starts off with 10-star movies and ends with 7-star comedies. I didn't rank them merely in terms of which made me laugh the most, but also how entertaining, interesting, unique or even visually excellent they are. But yeah, the laughs are the deciding factor, just not the only one.
This is the very essence of the popularity and status of privileged/elitist women such as Jennifer Aniston, who would never have passed a single audition had she not been born into a show-biz clan. Empirically average, yet hyped to such ludicrous extremes and for such a long time whereby most people were eventually duped into believing she's one of the most beautiful women in the world!!! Yes, it is shocking, funny, tragic, bizarre and idiotic - all at once.
And this is why beauty is NOT in the eye of the beholder. It is decided more often than not by the media, by hype, by liars and crooks. Beauty's beholder is the corrupt, fraudulent, hidden-agendas media.
Because I am fully immune to all types of propaganda, be it politics or women or music, there is hardly anyone else on the planet more qualified than yours truly to tell you which women deserve to be on a MOST BEAUTIFUL ACTRESSES list. And because I've seen over 4,000 movies and am a mini-expert in TV and cinema, this list is in fact the ultimate such list.
Aside from media hype, a combination of nepotism, blindness, bad taste, and gay casting directors (with gay aesthetics when it comes to women) are further reasons why women in film are becoming worse and worse. Whether Cameron Diaz, Jennifer Aniston, Kate Hudson, Julia Roberts, Jennifer Lopez, Jennifer Garner, Sarah Jessica Parker, Claire Danes, Jessica Biel, Milla Jovovich, Eva Mendez, or Drew Barrymore: increasingly homely and unfeminine women are being hyped as the next sex goddesses of cinema.
Think again. This list doesn't include any such estrogen-starved ladies. It's real women only.
Keep in mind that I didn't choose these photos. Obviously, some of the pictures of the older generations of actresses do not show them when they were young i.e. at their best. (Why anyone would place a photo of Anne Bancroft aged 98 on her page - beats me!)
The criteria used is primarily the face, and then charisma and sex appeal.
THE ORDER IS PRETTY MUCH DELIBERATE.
The rattlesnake is by far the best actor in this film.
Starts off decently enough, but soon bogs down in irrelevance. The thin plot is stretched, padded and then stretched some more. To add insult to injury, the sub-plot with the thug and his moronic girlfriend comes off as cheesy and totally unconvincing: badly scripted and performed.
In the end, she kills a bad guy. Not THE bad guy, but A bad guy. After all, THE bad guy is the Devil hence unkillable - except by God who prefers not to kill him(?) - whereas A random bad guy can be easily disposed of in a remote desert location.
Which brings us to the almost laughable "loophole" which the Devil - despite his eon-long existence - wasn't aware of. The woman, in an attempt to save her daughter from the Devil, chooses an evil person as her victim. This KINDA can't be the point of this lame little game Satan is playing... or? Stan can't be possibly trying to IMPROVE life on Earth by getting the bad guys killed. It makes zero sense. And yet that's what Stan achieves here: he blackmails the woman into killing a person, any person, which happens to be a very bad person. So Satan actually does a good deed!
Sillier still, Stan doesn't even try to warn the woman that she shouldn't try to "cheat" by killing a sociopath. But OK, if Stan did that, we'd be in a comedy, not a horror drama. In other words, for this not to turn into a farce or a spoof it was necessary to have a dumb Satan. Yes: a dumb entity that's been around for eons, being easily tricked by some random Earthling.
There's more illogic regarding the concept. Innocent victims of previous random murders become Satan's messengers. Which begs the question: how come God allows innocent people to end up in Hell? That's exactly what happens to all the victims, including the missing boy: their souls end up being Stan's! So God just stands by, disinterested, while all this is playing out? Or was he too busy playing golf with Gandhi? (No, wait, Gandhi is Hell...)
Yeah, religious-themed horror films - i.e. Heaven/Hell-priests'n'demons flicks - nearly always run into logic problems. Alas, such is the world of religion: self-contradictory hence mired in absurdities. This ESPECIALLY goes for what I refer to as "godless" religious flicks where only Stan seems to exist, with no clear signs anywhere of God and his chubby angels.
If you're going to have Satan (or his demons) as an actual character, then you'd better get God in there too, or at least a half-prepared priest, otherwise you're only including one half of the good-vs-evil concept - which amounts to utter nonsense. It's like a chess game with one player: pointless. Like political elections in a dictatorship.
Besides, what kind of a woman lets a small child wander around freely in a desert? Darwin would say this was natural selection, and I'd have to once again agree with him.
You need to be high - just like the two protagonists - in order to have fun with this.
One of those mildly "ambitious" genre-clusters that doesn't work because the film-maker lacks the know-how to combine them properly. Horror, comedy, drama, even romance are all lumped in here with fairly mediocre results.
The first hour is OK, but the film totally disintegrates in the last third. That's where the romance kicks in, and I mean syrupy romance of the kind you'd find in 50s movies, almost. Girl-flicks and the like. Yeah, after a whole hour of an uneasy mix of zombie drama and zombie comedy, they throw in romance into the stew... Nah, that won't work. I'm not saying there isn't any half-decent characterization to justify some seriousness, because there is. However, the whole segment with the neighbours being followed by weepy rom-drama was just a totally asinine move. Then we even have home invasion briefly during which the three intruders are brutally slayed - and then it's back to more weepy romance. Not so much a roller-coaster ride as a hodge-podge mess.
They even play Albinoni's Adagio - right after Debussy! There should be some kind of law prohibiting bad or average movies from using Albinoni and Debussy music. Especially if one of the romantic duo happens to be a hardcore junkie.
About that whole drug thing... I sense that the director didn't use drugs just to advance the plot (for example giving himself an excuse to not have the couple discovered by rescue forces, or as a means to kill their neighbours), but to primarily glorify drug use. The wife's comments after her husband decides to try out cocaine - of all things - in particular seem to prove that the director himself might have a fetish for snorting long white lines of Coward's Delight. Ironically, he makes the male character out to be "brave" because he finally tries the coke. Yeah, Mr. Left-wing Film-Maker, it sure takes COURAGE to run away from reality! Great logic. Left-wingers have been running from reality for over 150 years. Such a courageous bunch.
Hangar 10 (2014)
Three people bickering, and no plot. That's all you get here.
The stereotypes about found-in-sewage films having a meager plot and too many wobbly scenes are confirmed here, the film's big flaw. I can even get past the wobbliness, but the story makes absolutely no sense at all.
Is that area controlled by the army or the aliens? It can't be aliens working with the army (as is perhaps suggested by the last scenes) because one helicopter is downed. When Abbie Salt (looking very purrty) and the skinny guy enter the secret base how come there is nobody there except a few infected bodies? Where's the personnel, be it alien or human? Everything would indicate that the base is run by humans, but since when are secret gov't bases run without humans?
Regardless how you twist or bend the very thin facts, nothing adds up even half-way logically. It's all just one big nonsensical hide-and-seek-o-rama - a typical enough ploy in alien-abduction flicks - but this time taken to the extreme. To the extent where the viewer is literally as confused as the protagonists aimlessly wondering around.
It's a pity the plot is so dumb and random, because the mood isn't bad, especially at the base. It doesn't speak well for the writer(?) if he couldn't even manage to devise a thin, basic plot to accompany the action - which mostly consists of three people aimlessly wondering through the forest arguing. There is a limit to how much mystery upon mystery upon mystery you can layer atop itself until the entire thing crumbles like a deck of cards, like the joke that it is. A plot can be forgiven for certain types of flaws and for a certain quantity of nonsense, but not for being totally incoherent. All we know is that an infection is being tested on humans and animals. Who is doing it, for what reason, what's the government's role, what's the aliens' role, what's the purpose, why is the base abandoned yet has fresh guinea-pigs - none of those things are remotely answered.
Besides, how come none of the three people were shocked or at least worried about seeing so many animals dead on a field, before deciding to trespass on a piece of property nearby? Is it possible that the writer(?) believes that this is how average people react to such a discovery?
R stands for Rubbish.
A man who named all of his children after random words that start with the letter R should not try his hands at political themes, or anything else even remotely "intellectual". Kind of like Kanye shouldn't be doing music. Or Michael Jordan playing golf. Or me trying to write a classical symphony on a harp.
Subtle or even "subliminal" political propaganda is one thing (and which requires a modicum of intelligence and/or planning, not to mention restraint brought about by modesty and/or cunning and/or common sense), but this kind of blunt in-your-face political preaching/posturing is tasteless, ugly, plebeian, totally unartistic and primitive. This cretinous movie hammers home its idiotic virtue-signaling message with all the subtlety of Kanye at the height of his perpetual delirium telling the world that he is the biggest gift to music and alpha-maledom since... well since the beginning of time. Speaking of which, didn't Kanye create time? And space.
Not only is the film's political "message" based on lies, demagoguery and falsehoods, it is also blatantly and unapologetically ray-cist which drastically cheapens this already bargain-bin dirt-dumb script which was probably found in a dumpster - or at least written in one. The only thing baser than Rodriguez's dumpster-diving moral compass is his understanding of political and social issues, which is on the level of a child. A snot-eating child. A bullying booger-devouring child that enjoys torturing small animals. Because there is something essentially vile and misanthropic (oh, I know, that's considered hip hence good these days) about most of his films.
But why be surprised? Rodriguez prays at the altar of one called Tarantino, the only difference between these buffoons being that one is far more gifted in the "art" of making trash than the other. The nerdy one.
The film is utter trash, on all levels, just another kaboom blam-blam-blam pow-kaching action film geared for mouth-breathers. Making trash "ironically" doesn't elevate it to non-trash, not even close. Rodriguez essentially understands that he is utterly incapable of creating cinematic masterpieces (or anything remotely in that ballpark), so he resorts to the transparent approach of pretending to make crap on purpose, which is kind of, sort of, a hipster domain, despite RR not being in obvious cahoots with hipsterism. (Unless I find out he listens to Lame Impala or The Velvet Undies for their "lyrical depth".) Certainly I'd never label this man a hipster, because hipsters at least have the basic grasp of understanding how to pretend to be intelligent, whereas RR wouldn't even know where to begin in trying to fake the possession of intellectual faculties - at least such abilities that go well beyond the potential found in the average snot-sniffing action-movie fan.
An improvement over the previous one. Less beer-bongs means better stories.
An improvement over the first movie, which tended to over-focus on dumb American teens going "hooo-yeaaah" while wearing beer-bongs - that kind of putrid drivel. This time only one story involves that kind of useless dross, and it happens to be the weakest story by far.
Story 1, "Ghosts Are Always Mute But They Sure Like To Attack For No Reason", has a very clever premise. That is to say, a clever reason for why it was recorded in the first place, which is rare in found-in-sewage films. Unfortunately, rather than develop story-wise into something original, this segment goes down a familiar route about ghosts that go bump in the night and attack for no reason - except that that's, well, what ghosts are supposed to do. I didn't quite understand why the girl believed that having sex with that guy would fix the ghost problem, but at least it gave us a nice pair of real bnoobs - unlike the first minute of the movie which exposed us to a puke-worthy pair of chemical balls known as implants, knows as (to some people with no sense of aesthetics or taste) breasts. Fake breasts are not breasts, let's just put a stop to that rumour.
Story 2, "Zombies Love Their Children Too", is quite original and actually damn clever with its zombie-cam idea. Following the story, which would have been just another stereotypically boring zombie slaughter-orgy if filmed the conventional way, from the perspective of a slow-witted imbecilic zombie provides a much-needed influx of fresh energy in a sub-genre that's become stale a while ago. The funniest segment, with plenty of silly moments that should amuse anyone with a sense of humour. Others beware, this is NOT hipster material. Repeat: not hipster material whatsoever. Nothing deeply pseudo-intellectual about this story, just pure unadulterated goofy entertainment which might offend hipsters.
Story 3, "I Formed A Cult Just So I Can Boink Little Girls", is probably the best segment, with the most developed story - if one can call it that, considering that VHS films aren't known for their complexity. It starts with little promise, as a group of third-rate documentary-makers prepare to (foolishly) step into the lair of a very very very insane religious cult, but the plot goes absolutely berserk with quite a few twists and turns, not to mention gore and violence galore. Perhaps the demon in the final scene could have looked a little less cheesy, sort of like a large toy-goat almost. But fans of Cannibal Corpse should find plenty to enjoy.
Story 4, "Alien Abductions Are Very Rarely Scary So Why End The Movie With Those Boring Skinny Bald-Headed Dumb Space Nerds", is the weakest story. Not only is it the foundiest-footagiest of them all (i.e. unbearable to watch due to excessive wobbliness, annoying editing and other found-in-sewage horsemanure cliches) but it involves very boring-looking aliens who sound good but look like every friggin' Area 51 space-idiot that's ever been BSed about on History Channel by those damn liars and charlatans posing as scientists. Nor is it clear what the aliens want: they just abduct. Oh, they abduct? Well, that's not nearly enough, considering how unscary and absurd is (why would aliens ever do kidnappings?). It's illogical too: the first time they cause an earthquake nobody reacts. No clue why this lame story was chosen to be the story on the "watch" tape, because it kind of defeats the movie's increasing-quality curve: the stories got better and better until this one. You then expect the "watch" tape to really be the pinnacle, but it just sort of fizzles out wretchedly like a Kanye West album.
Story 5, the connecting story, is much better than the one in the first movie. For one, it doesn't have "hee-hee-heeing" moronic hooligans, and for another, the house resident has an actual background that is explored and that connects with the detective.
There's Something About Mary (1998)
There's Nothing About Mary. Absolutely nothing.
The only funny thing about Mary is that someone would believe the premise that a bunch of guys would go gaga over an ugly blonde. A blonde that looks like Andy Warhol after a sex-change. The rest of the cast is almost as bad; it's as if the Farrellys sabotaged their own script on purpose.
Come to think of it, they do that in nearly all of their movies. Their inept choice of actors is only "topped" by the Coen brothers' recent flops, or the senile Scorsese sticking that Lea Di Capria in all of his films. That's a man? You could have fooled me... Nobody can fool me.
Ben Stiller is an abomination, one of the unfunniest box-office-hit "comedian" in the history of cinema (alongside Will Ferrell and Adam Sandler). Giving Matt Dillon stupid fake teeth is somehow meant to turn him into a top comedian? And so on. How I envy people who love this turkey: they'll laugh at anything. Insanity is bliss.
Only a few visual gags that don't rely on the abysmal cast worked, all else is cringe-worthy.
Competent direction, but movie is ruined by awful, undisciplined script.
Typical manic, broad Aussie horror comedy, with wild and appealing direction but fairly imbecilic in other aspects. One of the most undisciplined zombie films ever, in the sense of making up things/rules as it goes along, throwing in almost randomly nonsensical plot-twists.
So the woman becomes a telepath just because she gets a few experimental injections? What's a zombie outbreak got to do with ESP? Why does she not telepathically control humans too then? Are all mad scientists sociopaths that clown around like buffoons? Dumber still, she somehow figures out that she can control zombies, all on her own, without having an inkling about the possibility; that's like a chimp somehow figuring out that there's a Tarzan audition, without the ability to read "Variety" or even knowing that "Variety" exists. (Can't think of a better analogy.)
Furthermore, gasoline loses its flammability hence use: WHY? Just so there could be that dumb shtick about zombies being used for fuel? How the hell does a virus affect the physical properties of gasoline? I know it's a zombie fantasy, and they ARE often very stupid, but that's just too moronic. There has to be some semblance of reality, otherwise even the silliest film falls apart. A good example of how to force the plot in the desired direction by making up random drivel. That only reveals the film-maker's incompetence, who is very capable as a director but a total fluke as a writer. (Sort of like Danny Boyle, an idiot savant.)
Yet the movie's biggest flaw is that it meanders very clumsily between tragedy and buffoonery, which is a narrative blasphemy, breaking the most basic rules of common sense. (Just imagine Kubrick including slapstick in "2001", having an astronaut slip on a banana peel and hit H-9000 by mistake and then get zapped by Hal and then starts screaming like a Bugs Bunny cartoon character.) Such movies fail at both comedy and drama, as all "greedy" films do; you can't have your cake and eat it too.
The mad scientist character is absolutely horrible, really dumb, downright anti-funny hence annoying; I wanted to press the stop button when he started doing his little dance. He belongs in an absurdist comedy (a bad one). Equally dumb is the notion that the Aussie military is made up of sadistic sociopaths who actually spend time killing off humans rather than helping them in an emergency situation: hence the writer/director must be yet another left-wing rebel-without-a-cause putz. Either that or he is just happy to advance zombie-movie cliches for the sake of it, which includes portraying the military in a stereotypically corny fashion.
Only for people who must watch every single zombie movie.
The Wicksboro Incident (2003)
Pitting an elephant against an ant is boring entertainment.
First let me tell you that this only minimally qualifies as a horror film.
An ultra-low-budget found-in-sewage "thriller" about an alien conspiracy so huge and absurd that it renders the plot pointless before it even starts unfolding. After all, if the aliens had already started infiltrating society 60 years earlier - to the extent whereby they can wipe out an entire town without having to explain themselves to anyone - and are by now controlling the FBI, corporations, and all the world's governments, AND have moon-bases, AND are telepaths too boot, then what bloody chance in hell do three puny humans have against them? It's the old elephant vs. ant story: a foregone conclusion doesn't create suspenseful story-telling. It's simply impossible to tell the elephant vs. ant story in a way that is exciting and unpredictable when the outcome is obvious.
Hence why I submitted this review as having spoilers, because those are the rules. Essentially there are no spoilers here. You know what you're getting already in the first 5 minutes. It's impossible to spoil an already spoiled film.
To make things even more predictable (if that's even possible given this premise), the movie is filmed as found-footage which means that we ANYWAY know from the get-go that nobody survived and that the aliens won. Movies with such a doomed starting premise, that the bad guys win, can only work if it offers something else to the viewer, something visual: an atmosphere, stylized violence - anything. But it's just a shoddy home-made camcorder flick so obviously we can rule that out too, which predictable turns out to be the case. There are literally no special effects at all, no flash, just people running away with wobbly cameras. You could film 90% of these scenes yourself.
The only mildly positive things: the cheese factor (the intro is like watching an episode of "Ancient Aliens"), the device that detects aliens (sort of cute), and the desert setting. Otherwise, it's just three guys running away from aliens (i.e. humans because they're body-snatchers i.e. a great way of saving money on special effects and costumes): and that's literally what the entire second half is about. They run away and get predictably bumped off one by one. The end. Aliens win.
Yes, we kinda knew that from the start, movie.
The last 20 minutes is basically boring night-time camcorder footage that leaves the viewer wondering when they're gonna turn on the lights. Very unexciting and lame.
The body-snatching shtick had been a big cliche already by the time 60s "Star Trek" dabbled in it (over and over), and by the time this little flick was filmed it had been so sucked dry that, honestly, what's the frigging point? "They Live" this ain't: that's how you do a movie about body-snatchers and alien conspiracy. But that had a budget, it was a movie, it had a story. I am not quite sure we can call these straight-to-video found-in-sewage thingies actually motion pictures. They're almost like home-made thrillers.
Atrocious? The movie is being too harsh on itself.
The M Night Shymyalayalaylan school of story-telling: bore the viewers for 90 minutes (OK, less than 70 here) then hope the end-twist can appease them. The twist is sort of unexpected, although I should have known, considering how guarded their mother is all the time, it was her and not some forest ghost. But can one surprise revelation make up for an hour of nothing?
Besides, the found-footage night scenes in the woods are so damn boring. The movie isn't atrocious but it's far from great either.
All the Boys Love Mandy Lane (2006)
For fans of unintentional slapstick.
Anybody know this "Fantasy Island" high school where there is only one "hot girl"?
It figures, nobody does. Already with that idea the movie reveals its absurdity and shoots itself in the foot. But wait till you see the plot-twists.
The two nincompoops responsible for this silly junk are the director and the writer, who show wholesale incompetence in their respective duties. The admittedly bland, amateur and unappealing young cast certainly sukks balls, but they're not the main culprits by far. The characters are boring "hey dude!" stereotypes, the set-up is cretinous, the slasherisms far too generic, the logic utterly non-existent - though at least the flick stays idiotic with a consistency that is almost admirable, in a dumb sort of way.
The ease with which a NERD (I mean, nerd!) kills everyone is a marvel; was I supposed to laugh? Perhaps this was "Scary Movie 6" but with gags so bad they're almost undetectable? Is nerd-boy's immunity to fists and bullets based on him being a supernatural being or is that just further proof that the writer and the director are supernaturally incompetent?
So Mandy Lane is a killer too, huh? No explanation given. I guess she just felt like it. Sort of the way I felt like urinating on the heads of the entire cast - plus those two clowns. Perhaps this dumb film is the reason Depp started slapping Amber Heard around? She should have never shown it to him. Bad idea; the guy is used to quality.
They should have made "All The Boys Love to Beat Up Mandy Lane - Especially Johnny Depp", a much more entertaining film.
Alien Abduction (2014)
This trash goes straight into the sewer.
So these "superior" aliens came all the way from Galaxy Stigma Zigma XZY just to play hide-and-seek with a bunch of losers? And they're so incompetent they can't even prevent an 11 year-old autistic kid from making yet another useless found-sewage film??
Some "superior" aliens they are.
A little lesson to these silly film-makers: rednecks aren't all potential serial-killers who play the banjo and behave like walking hillbilly stereotypes, and autism doesn't mean a person is emotionless like a robot (otherwise "Children of the Corn" would be about a village overrun by autistic lunatics). Quite to the contrary, autistic children (and adults) are more likely to totally freak out, especially in unusual situations.
Instead, the autistic kid in this mega-dull camcorder crappola is basically a robot who never gets angry, never gets fits, never gets hysterical and is the calmest of the group in these extraordinary (though admittedly boring) situations. Nor are all autistic people obsessed with numbers, you nincompoops. There are actually people out there who consider "Rain Man" a bible of autism.
I mean, an 11 year-old autistic kid is now the cameraman? What's next?
"The events you're about to see are totally true despite being obvious B-movie bull's sheet, and were filmed by a one-legged fetus crawling out of a punani." The movie telling us that an autistic kid filmed the events is an invitation for laughter: it's what the Pythons would have done. It's comedy material, you buffoons, not a horror film prologue.
The redneck is badly played by some fresh-faced drama-school student who clearly drinks hipster coffee at Starbucks and learned all he knows about rednecks from bad Hollywood films. They even gave him a red beard, just to make sure we believe he's an actual redneck, hoping we wouldn't instead rather laugh at that unconvincing performance.
Worse yet, once the group moves into the redneck shack, the plot crawls to a standstill for a while. Talk about a boring movie. Then the stupid-looking area-51-like aliens attack, and of course the camera goes fuzzy whenever they appear and of course the aliens shriek like jungle critters, because they're so advanced, superior and what-not. (Look, I'd make the images fuzzy too if my movie aliens looked this embarrassing.) The kid manages to keep everything in focus - until he enters the spaceship which is when the picture goes blurry. It's much more likely the director is autistic - or too cheap/lazy to get the sets and special-effects right.
Just so you don't think it's only boring - things get dumb too: the stupid camcorder is basically ejected from the spaceship, and lands - in one peace - on Earth, at the exacts same location even! So much for alien secretiveness! And so much for gravity breaking stuff with ease. In this movie gravity is just a slight annoyance, nothing meaningful. In this movie, found-sewage camcorders are immune to acceleration, impact and force.
I do not exaggerate when I say there isn't one remotely scary, interesting or exciting scene. A conglomeration of very old skinny-alien-moron cliches rendered even more useless by the incompetence of all involved. And that "autistic" kid is anything but: he behaves like an introverted child - which this inept "film-maker" thought was one and the same.
The "documentary-footage" interviews look less convincing than the average dumb Discovery program about the subject.
Underappreciated by the Rob Zombie crowd used to simplistic, idiotic stories and cheesy dialog.
Those perpetually stoned and dumbed-down voters gave this a fairly mediocre rating (despite a fairly low number of votes). In fact, the higher a rating, the likelier that the movie stinks - this definitely is a golden rule for recent movies. My rule is: generally avoid recent movies with averages higher than 6.5, and avoid ALL films with averages below 4.
I have absolutely no clue why an entertaining fantasy with so many twists and turns - not to mention a nice setting, fun premise, and originality - is so disliked by people. Perhaps horror fans have finally devolved to the amoeba stage, a point where they can only understand "Centipede V", they can only crave for "Saw VIII" and cannot do without Rob Zombie in which sadism and serial-killers are portrayed as values to strive for.
The premise is wonderful. Sure, there has been a fair amount of movies playing with the notion of reality in the past few decades, but they're still quite rare, especially compared to how many generic romcoms there are, dumb comedies, idiotic thrillers, or tirelessly predictable slasher flicks. So to over-criticize movies from this innovative, as-yet-unnamed sub-genre (let's call it the "what's real" fantasy) for minor flaws is to nit-pick at all the wrong places. (Sort of the way a Nazi sympathizer might point out to moral imperfections of someone working for the Red Cross while hailing the "virtues" of Hitler and his cohorts.)
The one flaw that's a bit annoying is that the two hook up despite the fact that the guy killed her aunt, when he was an Emo-hair-wearing little brat. In fact, ending up in the wheelchair was light punishment considering what the little turd had done when he was a kid. That woman was burned alive - and then spent a year in a coma! Bloody hell, almost like a twist/scene from a Freddy Krueger film, which is ironic because that's the character's name.
Still, if nothing it ties in neatly with some of the other stuff, not leaving any loose ends, which I was half-expecting to be the case. With these kinds of films, the more entangled a plot becomes, the more exponentially the chances rise that little or not enough will make sense as the story wraps up. So, yes, logically speaking the movie is built on a fairly solid foundation.
The atmosphere is good. The notion of huge black clouds encroaching on a desolate city in some unknown dimension should please any sci-fi fan. Horror fans perhaps not so much: as I said, modern horror fans (especially the younger ones) tend to be increasingly looking for sadistic flicks in which toothless hicks cut off an innocent dyevochka's limbs one by one - just because they ain't getting any themselves. Kids, if you're not getting any then just download free poorn! No need to hate women so much and have to watch them being butchered, just because you can't get any.
Geomi sup (2004)
Yet another example how "foreign" (i.e. non-American) horror films get overrated - just because they're foreign.
A bulk of IMDb's users are American. This explains entirely why American horror films are far more underrated than non-American ones, hence why "foreign" films on IMDb get much higher averages. Or perhaps it's because they're better? Hell no. Most Oriental horror films are just as generic as their Western counterparts, the vast bulk of Italian i.e. Gallo films are awful hack-jobs, most French horror films are more stylish but very flawed too. A typical non-American horror film has a rating of over 6, whereas a typical American horror film gets around 5 stars or less. The reason for this is simple: Americans have a sort of quasi-inferiority complex when it comes to cinema - at least among cinephiles this is true. Film buffs tend to get way too easily impressed by subtitles and incomprehensible languages. The snobs and hipsters that they often are, these so-called film buffs assume that - for example - a European movie has to be intellectual by default. "Ah, a European film! Must be intelligent." This is why IMDb's averages can only mean something when you compare movies within the same genre and from the same country. Don't ever make the mistake of comparing the averages of an American and a non-American (horror) movie. That leads to confusion and false expectations.
"Spider Island" - or "Gemini Soup" as it's called in its original - is like yet another David Lynch con-job in the Lost Highway or Mulholland Drive manner, in the sense that a complex mystery is set up but there is not even a half-way logical resolution, no real attempt to explain anything, just very vague "hints" that don't tie in with anything coherently.
Worse yet, the director clumsily makes bad transitions from back story to present to fantasy, and the three get so entangled, to the extent where it's impossible to tell which is which or when a shift from one to the other even takes place. The icing on the confusion cake comes with the three female leads, all of which are virtually indistinguishable from one another; name tags would have helped (like at McDonald's), because watching these virtual triplets alternately interact with the male lead - confounded by the awful time-transitions and clumsy editing - ensured that I had no clue what the hell is going on half the time.
When was he married? Was the office affair after that? Is he a ghost? If he's a ghost why can he talk with the cops? How come cops couldn't use DNA analysis to connect him to the murder? Why did the photo shop girl lie to him when she told him the spider forest story? Very sloppy writing too, not just directing.
A bland visual style, so typical of most Oriental films, doesn't exactly enhance the entertainment factor which is brought to a minimum what with the puzzling plot and the awfully slow pace; two hours is a stretch for this kind of low-grade nonsense.
The actresses are very cute though, as usual, and that certainly helps.
Case 39 (2009)
Starts well, then disintegrates into the usual cliches.
The first hour builds up nicely, but then the story gets stuck in a rut: why does demon spawn pretend to be nice around Renee? Why does Renee pretend to not know when both of them know what the other knows? Why does the kid wait so long to kill her previous guardians? It also makes no sense for her guardians to not say ANYTHING about her being a demon, either when a) they were fighting Renee and the cop in the kitchen or b) during their trial: this is the writer sort of half-cheating us by manipulating the characters to act illogically whenever it best suits him most. Lazy writing.
As in every godless religious horror flick, the powers of evil have infinite power and fighting them are mere helpless puny humans - leaving the viewer with the absolute certainty that the battle of good vs. evil can only have one outcome, hence the story becomes predictable hence the interest wanes. A mistake made far too often. You don't pit an elephant against an ant and expect to have a reasonably interesting fight. Otherwise everyone would flock to watch Tyson vs Scarlett Johansson. (Actually, people WOULD flock for that.) It's the same reason why the "Omen" movies are somewhat flawed: they are so predictable hence somewhat pointless, just a string of murders that eventually reduce the story to the levels of a dumb slasher flick.
If demon spawn possesses every magic power imaginable and is omnipotent in every way, why tell the story in the first place? As a result, I went from being immersed in the movie in the first half, to becoming utterly disinterested in the last half-hour - when things got very predictable and formulaic (and a little stupid) real quick. The intelligent thing would have been to include a priest to babble some Bible stuff thereby making the fight a little less one-sided. Nearly all thrillers disintegrate in the 2nd half and it's no different here. The last 10 minutes are literally scene-by-scene predictable.
It's pretty amazing that Jodelle Ferland plays a 10 year-old - and looks the age - yet was already 14 during the shooting.
OK - for a Gallo film.
Visually solid with a somewhat eccentric atmosphere - or one could simply say that this is yet another silly Gallo flick, hence eccentric and silly could very well be considered synonyms in this context.
The mystery is interesting enough in the first half but the resolution is typically Gallo in its shameless pursuit of nonsense: predictable, unscary, not quite logical and goofy.
The acting however is overall better than one normally gets in Gallo flicks infamous for their amateur, one-dimensional, over-dubbed actors.
Berberian Sound Studio (2012)
Just as with indie rock, many hipsters are forcing themselves to like this.
This is NOT a horror film but it's labeled as horror by certain viewers who think that a story ABOUT the making of a horror film - automatically becomes a horror film! (Great logic.)
So if you're a horror fan, don't waste 90 minutes of your non-hipster time on a very tedious and pointless piece of crap. Many horror fans get raging stiffies for movies that make references to other movies (the lamest form of cinema worship), so if you're one of those - plus someone who forces themselves to like movies that are vacuous and story-free - ignore my warning and knock yourself out watching a pathetic, boring, overweight little fella stare at walls in a sound studio while a group of Italians jabber away meaningless piffle.
The story is so thin it can be summed up in one word: crap.
The Bay (2012)
One of the very worst found-sewage films.
So chicken-poop can cause fish to become zombie vampires? Interesting idea. Perhaps the knowitalls who wrote this nonsense don't know that half of all species eat their own dung, not to mention other creatures' poop. If anything, the fish in Maryland should be healthier and stronger than ever: so much free food being dumped there.
Instead of making a half-assed eco-horror comedy, they chose to make a full-assed "found footage" piece of crap that's about as scary as a 5 year-old with fake fangs and about as interesting as watching a cow moo. No, take that back: cows mooing are far more interesting than a cute water bug attacking dumb humans. And because the incompetent "film-makers" (do found-footage amateurs even count as film-makers?) could not create real thrills, they resort to gross-out scenes of infected arms and legs. Any ey-hole can copy-paste a medical book and stick that onto the big screen. A proper plot and a scary mood? That's far more difficult.
A few scenes were actually unintentionally funny, such as the little mutant beastie scurrying away from the deck of a boat. You also gotta love the left-wing paranoia, the script-writers trying to fool us into believing that Americans are such a corrupt nation of egotistical, irresponsible imbeciles that they'd cover up just about anything - even events that could never be covered up, even with the best of effort. How the hell do you cover up the mass-carnage and dozens of corpses that happen in this idiotic film? "The government confiscated all the footage they could get their hands on". Yes, sure, whatever. The government is all-powerful and controls everyone's mobile phones. You could barely cover this up 100 years ago, let alone in this advanced technological age.
Incredibly boring film too; very disjointed, just a collection of almost random scenes. They tried so hard to try to make this thing mockumentaric and "realistic" that they forgot to make it cinematic - an experience. Cinematic experience? What am I talking about! This is friggin' found-footage malarkey made by people who don't know the first thing about film-making.
Barry Levinson made bad films before, but none of them is quite this crap.
A rather shambolic mission impossible.
I never had interest in watching these Asterix flicks, despite having been a big fan of the comics as a kid, because I could tell from a mile away that they must be really bad. But the other day this crap was playing on some TV channel and I chanced a peak.
I have to admit that I was instantly mesmerized. By the badness. It's so bad it's almost fascinating in a way. Really bad this ain't, this is actually horrible trash. It is unbelievably bad at times, and I mean Wes Anderson levels of bad almost. Adam Sandler? Worse.
Any attempt to turn a cheerful caricature comic-book into a real-actors feature is bound to fail - always. (James Cameron proved that even a huge budget can't help you create a good movie about sci-fi Smurfs.) No amount of CGI or script-fixing or attention to detail can come even close to helping replicate or match the kind of unique feel of the comics themselves: they're just two different dimensions, and one can never ape the other with any degree of success. Sure, some comic-book adaptations of movies may work, in their own cute little way, but they end up being entirely different in tone, feel and everything else. Already due to this simple and obvious fact (not so obvious to certain film-makers) this project was doomed from the start.
The other thing that helped doom it is French humour, which, while it may translate well into comic-books, nearly always fails on the big screen. French humour is extremely broad, bombastic, farce-like, the total opposite of subtle; basically way too buffoonerish to work on film. Banana-peel humour, the worst kind there is.
Yes, of course I'm saying this is almost as bad as Hollywood's Flintstones. Perhaps the fact that there was no Rosie O'Donnell helped Asterix be that ever-so-slightly little bit better than that turkey.
Visually, the flick has its moments. Some outdoor scenes look good, but that's pretty much it. The gags all bomb with the megatonnic nuclear power of Uranium-stuffed cringe-warheads. Every lame gag has the power to annihilate one entire civilization - that's how devastating they are.
The casting is pretty awful too. Gerard Depardieu is/was of course the only half-way reasonable option for the impossible role of Obelix, but even he can barely do anything to lift the curse. It's like asking an actor to perform magic; they're just actors, they can't perform miracles. The rest of the roles are mostly bad or mediocre casting choices.
What am I even saying... As if anyone could properly cast a movie such as this. It's undoable. It's like trying to defy gravity by buying lighter boots.
Area 51 (2015)
Yet another "advanced" alien species that allowed inferior humans to capture them.
Not as bad as one would expect a found-footage UFO flick to be. In fact, I expected this to be worse. A film that perpetuates the goofy 51 myth, but also perpetuates a fact we all know so well: that UFOlogists are the laughing stock of the "scientific" world.
Yes, the aliens are bug-eyed (OK, those are merely their suits - a slight attempt at originality). Yes, the aliens fly around in flying saucers. Yes, the aliens are so elegant and advanced they don't need any machinery to fly their circular thingies. Yes, the aliens are held captive by the U.S. government who for some reason never want to tell us anything about them. (Nor do we understand how come superior creatures allow themselves to be trapped and held by such inferior species as humans). Yes, Area 51 is made up of huge underground mazes just as you've seen them in computer games. Yes, those mazes are quite empty whenever intruders find themselves there. Because, clearly, it takes 5 people to keep the aliens imprisoned.
So, yes, it's full of idiotic cliches. But it's also watchable. Sure, it tells us from the get-go that nobody survived, which kinda makes the ending less exciting (not that it would have been a lot more exciting if we didn't know), but this IS found footage, which means that whoever filmed the nonsense must be dead, abducted or exploring alien dimensions in a hypercube or something or other.
Surgery buffs will get a kick out of this nonsense.
Any surgeons out there? You guys and girls will especially "enjoy" this nonsense. You will be like Mike and the robots from MST3K doing a running commentary, and that goes for the grand finale in which the main characters attempt to engage in DYI cranial surgery. Without anesthesia. Without sterilized instruments. This absurd premise is pushed so far that the main female protagonist (who is amazingly stupid) drills a hole into her own head, while standing, and without any pain-killers. She then places a handkerchief over the wound (kinda like bringing a hammer and nail into the orbit to fix a NASA shuttle) and then goes into fight mode vs the zombies. A scene so dumb I could swear Stephen King had written it and Argento directed it. With De Palma acting as adviser.
The characters do everything to make their own extermination as easy as possible. There is certain logic in panic-stricken people making wrong decisions, but these five just do and say way too many dumb things. For example, the curly hair guy keeps touching everybody despite being told that a major infection has taken over.
That main female character comes off as a moron who just sits there and stares at walls, pondering what to do after the realization that she's pregnant. As if the viewers give a hoot about her pregnancy. Apocalypse or pregnancy? Yes, I'd say the former wins.
What gets the movie some points is the somewhat original premise of a Facebook-like evil conglomerate causing the zombie plague by lobotomizing their viewers to use the site more. That explains why the symptoms are nearly exactly the same from person to person. Sure, it's a bit reminiscent of "Pulse" or "Pontypool" and a few other films but it's not reminiscent of 1000 movies - at least as far as the explanation is concerned. As for the zombies, they're stereotypical fare mostly.
Michelle Mylett, the one who drills a hole into her own head, is unfortunately a symptom of our dumb, twisted age: an anorexic actress whose arms are as thin as my fingers. How the hell does a mentally-ill approach to diet become the social norm - and a sexy look! Naturally, she's flat-chested as well, because there seems to be a conspiracy in American show-biz as of late that no chesty women are allowed into movies or TV. This is very obvious and blatant discrimination and I'm amazed that nobody seems to have picked up on it - especially large-breasted women who should feel annoyed and disrespected by it.
Itsy Bitsy (2019)
I was on the spider's side until he killed the cat. I wasn't on Team Spider after that.
I am a big fan of horror-movie silliness. One such example is how the horror events are initiated here. An African guy arrives uninvited to the house of the widower of a woman that helped the African during his childhood. It's basically the black guy saying something like "I owe your wife a lot, and so to repay my debt to her, I bring you this gift - a huge spider that will start killing people off randomly and make your life miserable". Not in these exact words, of course, but that's basically what he came for.
It makes little sense, especially his smashing of his "gift", which resulted in his own demise - indicating that he didn't know what the hell he was bringing. And yet, we were previously led to believe that he did know.
But yeah, ignore logic. The main thing is that the writer got an excuse to unleash the spider! Sure, he could have done this in a much more intelligent, more convincing way, but I guess logic (and especially writing) isn't his strong suit.
There is more bizarre nonsense later on too. For example the bizarre sheriff, played with B-movie zeal by the highly untalented nepotist Denise Crosby, prying into whassername's private affairs, just because whassername was freaked out by a kid screaming at the window. Well, it's either that or because the local sheriff is bored and likes to pick up the latest gossip. I didn't realize a sheriff's job description included being a psychologist to random strangers, even if the cop in question happens to be a woman.
Not that I immediately realized that Crosby was a female sheriff.
In fact, every time Sheriff Crosby appears, her character just gets weirder and dumber. One of her assistant cops is cast as a weird-looking slacker type from a Linklater indie flick. The whole film is like this: off. Tilted to the side. To the side of unnecessary silliness.
Rather silly is the nurse's reaction when she shoves her kids out of the spider-infested room: instead of following them outside, she STAYS inside, as some sort of pointless moment of self-sacrifice - as if having herself killed right in front of them will somehow be beneficial to her kids. She had plenty of time to leave the room, hence her decision was a laughably over-dramatic plot-device decision from the awful writers.
Speaking of dramatic, there is way too much family drama here, especially for a horror film. A MONSTER flick with characterization! Yeah, we sure needed that. We are constantly bored with her flashbacks and her pill addiction. I mean, it's not even a proper addiction like heroin or crack!
The spiders start wrecking havoc only ONE HOUR into the movie. So yes, you've been warned. By the time they finally go on the attack against humans, you will be so utterly bored you won't give a hoot. Or you might even be rooting for them.
Then again... the cat. Unforgivable. Spiders are definitely the bad guys here.
When asked how she bumped her head, the girl says: "I was looking for kitty-cat in the sticky snow with the dolls." Of course, if she had simply said "I was trying to find the missing cat in the huge-ass spider web that's covered the entire attic as well as all my dolls" then the plot would have gone forward, moving somewhere. Alas, kids get used as padding, as goofy plot-devices to stretch out a thin plot about a large spider invading a house. Because nobody ever believes them. And because they speak Nonsensese at the most inopportune moments. Well, I did say the writing was pitiful.
Why are the three of them allowed to remain in the house after the owner is found killed by something that might indicate a biological threat? No explanation there either.
What Planet Are You From? (2000)
Funny and underrated.
It would seem most people aren't capable of appreciating Garry Shandling's comedy, nor does it sit well with the self-righteous crowd that a movie could be this playful with male and female "stereotypes" (i.e. politically-incorrect truths).
Also, many people must have expected a comedic version of "E.T.", or an even dumber take on "My Stepmother Is An Alien". It's none of those things. This is a relaxing, amusing, non-pretentious yet clever flick about the sexes. Whoever was seeking the meaning of life here have only themselves to blame. It's just a Hollywood comedy, and a good one at that. One of the last truly good comedies to come out of Unhollywood, just before the Ben Stiller mafia took over.
80s at its very worst.
How best to describe this barely watchable Z-movie? Brady Bunch humour meets splatter trash (and I mean TRASH) meets sophomoronic sex jokes meets Playboy Productions. If I tell you that "Police Academy 5" is ultra-sophisticated next to this unfunny garbage, will you think I'm exaggerating? Don't, because I'm not. This is tard-comedy but not in any kind of good way. Make that mega-tard.
If John Waters ever decided to do a sex horror comedy it would look like this. Hell, now I AM exaggerating: his version would be even worse than this crap. I guess only his blithering incompetence could possibly top this.
Boring every step of the way, with dialog that's a combo of ultra-corny and extremely dull and cartoonish. If idiotic formula 60s sitcoms make your sides split, this dross is for you. Otherwise dump this in the trash. I am positively petrified that many like this drivel; that's some really scary stuff, the fact that there are so many people who find something to enjoy in this kind of intentional so-bad-it's-good (except that it's just "so bad") piece of dilettante crap made by people without an ounce of talent, intelligence or style. It's actually downright bone-chilling that there are "cinephiles" out there so deluded that they actually attempt to intellectualize how this kind of garbage has some hidden artistic merit. Might they be the same people who listen to Neutral Milk Hostel and Sigur Ross and who consider 30s vampire movies scary?
The should-be-embarrassed cast mugs their way through this turkey as if facial contortionism were the height of comedy. Even Nick Cage didn't know that overacting could be this bad. The female cast? Franklin is awfully cute, even (or especially) because dressed as Cindy Lauper, but then we also have Woronov who is a pre-op tran-wreck. Which brings us back to John Waters; surely he must have at least financed this dreck?
The creature effects are pathetic, boring, dumb.
Storage 24 (2012)
Knuckleheads bicker over love issues in the midst of a monster/earthquake thingy.
Yet again the military has nothing better to do than make uncontrollable, dumb monsters. Yes, it's one of those films.
The movie that gives the viewer the middle finger far too often, and already in the first half. Usually dim-witted horror films do most of their middle-fingering during the not-so-grand finale which is usually full of dumb plot-twists. This one however warms up speedily. It doesn't want us to wait to be annoyed.
There is a huge earth-shattering event. Earthquake? Terrorist attack? No, a plane crash in the middle of London. But does this extreme event in any way shape or form affect the idiotic threesome in the storage room? I mean the two blondes and the Ey-hole. No, it doesn't affect them at all. Not only does the homely blonde with the flat chest continue with her storage-foraging, her two friends are just so chipper, as if the earthquake somehow circumvented them. Dunno how, but despite drastically affecting the workers in the building - for whom it felt like a 9.0 earthquake - these three knuckleheads evidently felt nothing. How?
Well, that's how you middle-finger your audience, by treating them like idiots and what better way to achieve this than using dumb characters who can't act logically in any given situation.
Lame excuse for why the mobile phones don't work: the crash is to blame. One of the dumber examples why phones can't be used for help. (A constant headache for mobile-phone-era thriller/horror writers.)
Then we have the black guy who rapidly becomes extremely annoying with his wuss-whinging about being dumped. By whom? By that homely flat-chested airhead; apparently SOMEONE making this movie considered her hot enough to have two young guys fight over her. And the two start discussing their bloody boring useless relationship despite the airplane incident, despite the fact that she must have felt that earthquake thingy just like everyone else in that building, and despite her mediocre looks. Seems this actress is a MODEL too! Won't the bad jokes ever stop? First hipsters tried to convince me that Neutered Milk Hostel was a great band, now they're trying to sell shoddy anorexic women as sexy! Perhaps this world is so far gone up its own eysh that it deserves to have a monster eat us all.
Antonia Campbell-Hughes is her name. Just check out how this "actress" acts, especially during the high-stress situations. An IKEA chair shows a wider range of emotions. The worst actress in the Solar System. Even when attacked by a monster or when slapping her new boyfriend after he almost had her killed she still refused to act. Too many incompetent nincompoops are in show-biz despite being mega-untalented. Is this some kind of a conspiracy by people who hate cinema?
On top of all that stupid, useless drivel we've got a typical, standard, generic, corny monster-on-the-loose plot that anyone older than 5 must have seen a 100 times already. But even when it becomes abundantly clear that something bad is happening in the building, these dumb character still discuss who cheated on whom and why! Bloody hell! Is this a dumb monster movie or "Eastenders"?
And the irony is that the anorexic blonde looks more alien than the monster! Won't these Z-movie ironies never stop with the nonsense?
Once the action starts things don't improve. They just get dumber. Just check out all the nonsense concerning the homeless guy. Absolute rubbish.
A jungle flick without a Global Warming message? How dare they.
The movie decides to be annoying early on. It doesn't wait. It goes for the annoyance straight away almost.
First it offers us an incredibly dumb premise: some kind of half-witted, absurd, unrealistic juvenile delinquent program that actually intentionally strands teens, one by one, one per deserted island, for THREE days. Count 'em. Three. Not just overnight. A kind of Naked & Afraid except no naked. Is this ridiculously far-fetched program run with any safety precautions at least? No. Are the kids able to alert the woman Kay for help if something happens to them? No, they can't. How are they supposed to survive three days and nights without proper skills after just two weeks of "training"? Kay has no clue, she just dumps them there. Why are they being dumped on islands that aren't deserted? Kay wouldn't know, she's part of a moronic program which doesn't take danger into consideration, at all. Well then, how many people run this program? Just the one, Kay, it seems. She dumps them on islands, then comes alone - at night - to pick them up several days later in a crappy tiny boat which apparently she alone inhabits. So she's program boss, skipper and counselor? Yup. In Toby's case, she actually arrives EARLIER than planned - which is stupid, because how is dopey Toby supposed to meet her? He'd been expecting her in the morning. Sillier still, she calls out his name upon arrival, as if she'd just landed into a house, not a vast island. That's how smart she is. That's how smart this movie is.
Hence, logically, this dumb program must be setting kids on RANDOM islands. If that weren't so, then Kay would not have chosen the dangerous horror island - which the program couldn't have used before, because if they had then Kay and some other kid would have been killed earlier. So it's a Juve program that not only endangers teens but doesn't even use the same - hence more reliable - islands every time... Wow. Now, that is so idiotic.
Why is dopey Toby even in this program? It's supposed to be a Juve program, yet where is the evidence he ever did anything criminal? There is none. His father got killed by masked men, so obviously he gets sent to a Juve program on the other side of the world, run by a daft woman called Kay. Makes so much sense.
But hey, the lost and confused writer-director needed an isolated setting in which a lost and confused dopey Toby could get no help hence where he could be easily killed off.
Secondly, the writer-director decides to annoy us with the usual, by now standard and expected, liberal propaganda. Yes, even in a remote-island monster flick we don't get spared the usual PC nonsense. Dopey Toby mumbles something about "Robinson Crusoe" being "very progressive" for its time because it pushed the gay-rights agenda. And, apparently, because the book addresses "western colonialism" i.e. the film manages to throw in a little bit of white-guilt too. LGBT and white guilt: cute. Because the writer-director is genuinely brainwashed or because he wants to suck up to Hollywood's Establishment? It's no secret that the capital of American cinema hires only politically subservient sycophants these days. Find me a Hollywood director or writer younger than 50 who isn't a liberal and I'll find you Hangars 18, 19 and 20, all full of goofy-looking aliens. Reverse McCarthyism? It's because McCarthy wasn't allowed to do his job that we have what we have now...
Besides, if the writer-director wants to suck up to Unholywood, then he should have included Global Warming too. Doesn't he realize that EVERY movie now has to include at least one message about the impending Armageddon? Manbearpig would definitely NOT approve of this blatant omission. Sure, gay rights and white guilt are all well and fine, but to fail to include THE trendy agenda of the moment is a pretty ignorant move from this director. He needs to be more aware of Global Whorening, if he wants to successfully who-re himself out to UnHolywood.
Thirdly, the movie presents us a dopey Toby who is initially introverted, depressed and glum. He doesn't say a word on the boat. And yet, as soon as he is dumped on the island by Kay, he goes into "comedy relief" monologue-banter, being uncharacteristically jovial. So why this sudden, absurd transformation? I was half-expecting a third Toby to show up, one who was a martial arts expert. Well, why not? After all, they already gave us two Tobys within just 10-15 minutes! There should have been at least 5-6 more Tobys by the time this pathetic film mercifully ends.
It gets dumber. It always does in such films. He comes across a lanky fashion model, very much a jungle version of Lara Croft. She turns out to be the monster. We find this out in a very silly exposition scene in which a woman gives us the whole story... while being freshly impaled by a tree-trunk. Any explanation as to what these Americans were doing on a remote Asian jungle island in the first place? Of course not. Any explanation how people can talk on and on while being freshly impaled by a tree trunk? None. Admittedly, no such explanation exists, at least not in this universe.
The girl's appearance is totally unconvincing, looking like she walked straight out of Vogue magazine. She doesn't remotely resemble a "feral child" from the jungle who'd spent a decade there. I half-expected her to ask Tobey whether he had some coke stashed away somewhere. Her character isn't much smarter than a fashion model either: she never figures out that she's the monster, in all those years, which is fairly far-fetched - yet so typical of this inept writer-director.
Very predictably dopey Toby gets the woman killed before she could tell him the truth. WHY couldn't Toby have listened to her before escaping?! It's so dumb. They get involved in an absurd jungle chase (because clearly this writer-director has only been in special plastic jungles with built-in running tracks hence believes people can just run, skip and hop freely there at great speeds). She runs into one of her own traps - which is so dumb on so many levels, i.e. yet another lame plot-device. As if we hadn't realized that she isn't the killer. Far too convenient the way the director shows her coming out of Kay's boat carrying Kay's belongings. It is obvious audience manipulation, obvious plot-devicing.
Nor is it clear where from the black Rasta kid suddenly appears. He mumbles something about him and Toby going back to his island. This would imply he SWAM all the way to Toby's! Did he? How did he do that? Why did he do that?
Actually, it's totally irrelevant. It's a dumb movie. If the writer-director doesn't know, how should we.
I wish the director all the best with his Hollywood-hunting. May he land a dozen big-budget movie deals there. Just as long as he finally includes Global Warming propaganda in his next awful flicks, because NOT including Global Warming these days - i.e. just years before we all get cooked by the effects of unbridled capitalism when Earth hits temperatures of 1500 C - is really just not on.