Read + Write + Report
Home | Start a blog | About Orble | FAQ | Blogs | Writers | Paid | My Orble | Login
 
Picking the rare gems out of a sea of crap.... so you don't have to!

Movie Review: The Final Destination

December 22nd 2009 11:37


Premise: A group of friends are watching a car race, when one has a vision of a freak accident that results in several cars crashing, destroying part of the stadium and killing a fair chunk of the audience. He leads his group and a few others to safety, avoiding their deaths. However, Death isn't finished with them just yet, and they will have to find a way to save themselves before Death catches up with them.


Now, I liked the first Final Destination. It was a good premise, the deaths were fun and inventive, its was just a good, fun movie. The second one; nothing new, but still a fun ride. To be honest, I didn't bother with the 3rd, but I can imagine it was more of the same and didn't wander hopelessly astray like FD.

To sum it up: This movie is crap. Pure, unadulterated crap. My personal highlight of the movie was getting to see Justin Welborn, who to date I have only seen in excellent low budget flicks (The Signal, The Other Side and Dance of the Dead, if you must know). Seeing him in it gave me hope that this might hopefully not be as bad as I feared.... But it was. Thankfully his character was killed off early, so my memory of him is not tarnished by this attrocity.

Acting: Terrible. Crap. Awful. Insert any expletive you can think of here, trust me, it's applicable.

Script: I suppose by the 4th installment of any series you will have to expect some decline in quality... I mean, who has enough ideas to carry a series that far? But this is just a piss-poor attempt to milk the final drops of money out of a dead franchise.


The thing about a movie series is... you have to obey the rules. If things are a certain way in the first movie, you can't randomly change the rules in the 4th movie without leaving the audience scratching their heads. Well, I was left scratching my head until I drew blood.

******** HERE BE SPOILERS ********

For example: The whole premise of the movie is that Death is trying to wipe these kids out to restore the natural order of things. The kids aren't meant to be alive, and so freak chances will kill them so that life can go on as it was meant to. That's the GOLDEN Final Destination rule. You HAVE to play by that rule, right? WRONG! In this movie, the writers obviously thought 'fuckit, we're sick of having to make sense, so we're just going to ignore the dogma of the last 3 movies and make our own rules!'. In order to kill off the last few kiddies, there's a massive explosion that wipes out half a cinema, and then half a mall, just to nail the kids.

"But wait", I hear you cry. "Those other innocent bystanders weren't meant to die! Death can't kill them without upsetting it's own natural order! That doesn't make any sense!"

That's absolutely correct. However, Mr. Writer Man gets paid regardless of whether he makes sense or not, and obviously making a quality script would have interfered with him snorting coke out of a hooker's ass, so he didn't bother.

More plot holes: Apparently everything in the movie, visions and death-avoidance included, happened so that the final 3 kids could all be sitting in a cafe to get hit by a truck. I say: BALLS! Apparently the writers think they are oh-so-clever because they can insert a final twist into the movie, even though it doesn't make any sense at all.... personally I blame all that coke they've been snorting. It's like an assassin standing over a target, letting him go, and then coming back later and killing him... with absolutely no reason for letting the target go in the first place. Perfectly logical, right?

It gets even friggin' worse. There's a whole scene in a barber shop where there's a loose fan, and a can of hair spray that magically moves into a hot hair straightener. The can explodes, and flies straight into the fan, knocking it off the roof, where it falls... straight at the victim's feet. It's not like Death has bad aim; the victim was sitting in a barbers chair. The victim then gets up and leaves, but gets hit in the eye by a flying rock.

"But that just sounds like the writers were stupid and added the hair spray rocket for no reason at all! Why would they do that!?"

Why, indeed.

Effects & Death Scenes: Always the highlight of FD Movies... these were still disappointing. Very disappointing, actually. The CGI was bad, the props were bad, everything was just bad.

I am sitting here, trying to think of the redeeming qualities of this movie. EVERY movie has a redeeming feature, right? Some are funny, some have some hot sex, some have a memorable death scene... FD4 really has none of the above. There are tits, but only for about 5 seconds. There is death, but the lame effects and predictability make them far from memorable. In fact, the defining quality of FD4 is it's all-around, 10/10, perfect score crappiness.

Stay away from this movie if you value your time, you sanity, or your taste in quality cinema. My first thought when the credits started rolling was... I'm glad I watched a pirated copy and didn't contribute a cent to this abomination. I've wasted my time; please don't waste yours.
63
Vote
   


Movie Review: The Signal

July 10th 2009 06:45


Premise: A weird signal begins to broadcast over every TV, radio & phone. Those that are exposed to it have their perceptions warped, suffer hallucinations, and are convinced to kill those around them. The story is told in 3 parts (or transmissions): The first follows the story of a girl name Mya (Anessa Ramsey), who is married to controlling husband (AJ Bowen), but is sleeping with another man (Justin Welborn). The second transmission follows the husabdn, Lewis, and the third follows the lover, Ben.

The Signal should be applauded as an example of low-budget film-making. Despite the use of some pretty convincing prosthetics, the movie relies on clever fliming and non-linear plotlines to tell it's story.

What makes this movie so entertaining is it's portrayal of the signal-induced madness. This movie features alot of hallucinations: Sometimes we know what it is, other times we don't. Couple that with convincing acting from all characters, both lead and supporting, and what you are left with is a highly entertaining use of 103 minutes. One of the goriest points in the movie is when Ben brutally crushes Lewis' skull by repeatedly smashing it with the tank of a pesticide sprayer, and then we snap back to reality and realize it was just a hallucination.

Speaking of gore, there are some deliciously brutal scenes that the gorehounds will salivate over. I like to think the talking-head sequence was a homage to Reanimator, needless to say I was entertained. Possibly the most disturbing point of the movie was seeing Lewis torture a woman by spraying pesticide in her eyes, and then spraying it down her throat to kill her... so there isn't much holding back despite the low budget. The movie cleverly keeps alot of the gore off-camera and keeps the rest in quick shots, making it violently brutal and effective.

The acting, as I mentioned, is solid all-round.
They're Heeeeere
Special credit goes to AJ Bowen as Lewis, the creepy controlling husband trying to find his wife. What makes this movie so special is it's ability to confuse, and the acting is definitely a contributing factor. I also like how they have handled the insanity element: All of the people affected by the signal don't really realize it, and are logically convinced to kill people. As such, no one is really crazy, and yet everyone really is. Knowing that everyone is affected, and no one is immune, really adds to the sense of tension. The movie leaves you confused and afraid, not knowing if anything you are seeing is actually real... and it's remarkably effective.

Another special mention to Justin Welborn. I knew I'd seen that face before: He has been in both of the (excellent) Gregg Bishop movies that I have seen, Dance of the Dead and The Other Side. This guy must be having a good run with low-budget horror movies, so keep an eye out for him.

The gore, as I mentioned, is not as plentiful as it could have been, which helps keep the movie from degenerating into a total-bloodbath. That being said, there is plenty of blood being splashed around, people getting stabbed, etc., so gorehounds should be happy.

Perhaps the highlight of the movie, for me, was the second transmission, following Lewis. The middle of the movie contained some delightfully funny moments. Comic relief is provided in the form of Chad McKnight as Jim Parsons, a Quagmire-esque next door neighbour who shows up for a party, ready to have sex and totally unaware of the carnage being caused by the signal. He has a number of classic lines, like "When that ball drops, I'm gonna grab a slut and I'm just gonna pee in her butt!". The humour is totally dead-pan, and utterly hilarious. And then without a second to savor it you are thrust back into the insanity and carnage, which I found brilliant.

Overall, a film with tremendous punch for such a low budget, only being shot for $50,000. Definitely worth picking up, I would probably rate it more entertaining than Bug in the whole insanity/psychological horror department.
79
Vote
   


Movie Review: 1408

July 3rd 2009 13:16


Premise: A jaded paranormal investigative author (John Cusack) travels around debunking supposedly haunted locales, despite the fact he has never seen a ghost. That is, until he decides to stay at the notorious room 1408 of the Dolphin Hotel, despite the strong protests from the hotel's manager (Samuel L. Jackson).

First up, I am a huge fan of both John Cusack and Samuel L. Jackson, so my perceptions of this movie may be a little biased. However, I don't think that is the reason I like this movie so much.

Acting: This movie is basically a one man show, centered entirely around John Cusack's character Mike Enslin. Mr Jackson puts in a suitably ominous performance as the hotel's manager, but the focus is firmly on Cusack, who puts in a fine performance.

Script: I've read a few reviews that say this movie is illogical... and to these naysayers, I have this response: You can find flaws in anything if you look hard enough. However, the flaws in this movie's script are not nearly enough to ruin it for me. Another thing I like about the script is that it doesn't even attempt to explain why the room is 'haunted'. Alot of movies fall flat when they venture off into crappy explanations, and I'm glad 1408 isn't one of them.

Direction: the directing from Mikael Håfström is pretty excellent. The movie is a tension-machine, and in several scenes it is so thick you could almost cut it with a knife. As I've mentioned in other reviews, I generally like a good mix of tension and gore in my horrors, but this movie shows that you don't need alot of gore to make a great horror. My housemate watched this one with me, and she reckons she'll have trouble sleeping tonight.

Score: I was surprisingly impressed by the musical accompaniment to 1408. A tension-based movie can sometimes fall flat with a dull and lifeless score, but the music used in this one adds immensely to the tense atmosphere... especially the use of The Carpenters' 'We've Only Just Begun'...

Effects: This one is high-budget, and the effects are pretty top notch. CGI is used, but quite sparingly compared to other high budget films I've seen recently. However, it is effective when it is used, and the more traditional effects are also effectively used.

Overall: I have a growing fondness for tension-based horror, based on excellent movies like this one. I'm even thinking about revoking my gorehound status and becoming a terror-maniac. Who would have guessed?

Hey, is that a pig flying past my window?
73
Vote
   


Movie Review: Sympathy

June 19th 2009 05:41


Premise: A bank robber abducts a girl and hides out in a motel, with the intent of driving to an airport in Canada the following day. During the night, the bank robber and the girl are both themselves taken hostage by an escaped convict. As events unfold in the motel room, we begin to learn about each of the characters, and discover that no-one is what they seem


[ Click here to read more ]
31
Vote
   


Movie Review: Bug

June 11th 2009 04:42


Premise: A woman named Agnes (Ashley Judd), is being stalked by her newly released from jail, abusive ex-husband, Jerry (Harry Connick Jr.). Meanwhile, a friend brings over a guy named Peter for her to meet (Michael Shannon), and the two hit it off. Turns out things aren't as simple as they seem, when it turns out that Peter is on the run from the army, who were performing experiments on him in a military hospital


[ Click here to read more ]
44
Vote
   


Moderated by Someone
Copyright © 2006 2007 2008 On Topic Media PTY LTD. All Rights Reserved. Design by Vimu.com.
On Topic Media ZPages: Sydney |  Melbourne |  Brisbane |  London |  Birmingham |  Leeds     [ Advertise ] [ Contact Us ] [ Privacy Policy ]