More found footage goodies

Hollow:

Story:

Four friends travel to an abandoned monastery, unaware of the dangers that come with it.

Review:

Hollow is a perfect example of disappointing found footage, yet it's also one of the best horror films in that subgenre that I have seen. It shows that people can make a subpar found footage horror film that has some relativity to it.

What I liked the most:

1. A lack of emphasis on jump scares.

Usually found footage is known for having a ton of jump moments thrown in to distract from the lack of creepiness. Hollow does the opposite. There is an underlying creepy factor in it, but the majority of the focus ends up being on more human issues.

What I liked the least.

1. Lack of supernatural involvement.

Not to spoil too much, but this actually ends up being a movie that's mediocre for not so typical reasons. The creepy factor is in there from the start, and there are weird elements, but that's it. There's nothing until it's too late, since the movie focuses more on the characters than the creepy "oh there's ghosts" parts. This would have been better as a drama, had the few supernatural moments been removed.

Who I recommend Hollow to:

People who want more humanity in their found footage films.

Creepy demon movies with found footage!

The Last Exorcism Part II:

Story:

Nell finds refuge in a shelter, only to discover that the demon Abalam is still pursuing her.

Review:

With a Metascore of 33 and an IMDb rating of 5.1, I wasn't expecting this to be overly good, but Ed-Gass Donnelly and company did a surprisingly good job continuing the originally mediocre series.

What I liked the most:

1. A somewhat original possession story.

Despite some cliches, the story manages to keep its originality, maintaining a unique and engrossing story about Nell's struggles with demons.

2. Nell.

Nell's character is a perfect balance of good and bad, making her character very easy to connect to in a very disturbing story

What I liked the least:

1. The ties between the original movie and this one.

Part II did a great job, but it was partially ruined because of its connection to the first part. This would have been even better as an original movie instead of a continuation.

Who I Recommend The Last Exorcism Part II to:

Those looking for a different demonic horror film.

---

Sinister

Story: A struggling writer moves his family into the house of the murders he's investigating. The truth behind the murders puts his and his family's life in danger.

Review:

For a paranormal film, Sinister is amazing. It's an intriguing horror film with enough scares and creepy dread building to keep it going. I'm going to cut this short and say this movie is worth watching, especially if you're a horror fan. I thoroughly enjoyed Sinister.

What do you get when you combine Paranormal Activity and Signs? Dark Skies of course!

Dark Skies

Story:

A family is terrorized by hostile forces that may or may not be extraterrestrial.

Review:

If you read the title and my review of the most recent Paranormal Activity film, then you already know my opinion of Dark Skies.

It was terrible.

Some randomly thrown in jump scares, mixed with a tiny bit of dread and a very Saw-like twist near the end made this a very forgettable film.

What I liked the most:

1. The few creepy dread building moments.

Surprisingly enough, there were moments that managed to jar me from almost falling asleep, and the build up of dread was actually well done.

2. J.K. Simmons performance.

Even in a horrible film such as Dark Skies, J.K. Simmons still performs amazingly.

3. The soundtrack.

Whoever composed the soundtrack knew what they were doing, and made the film a bit creepier by with the spine tingling tracks.

What I liked the least:

1. Everything else.

Even forgetting Keri Russel's underwhelming performance, the movie played out like a C-grade cheap budget horror film with some equally cheap special effects thrown in.

Who I recommend Dark Skies to:

Well, if you liked the Paranormal Activity films, then you'll probably like Dark Skies.

The Side Effects of Having a Dragon Tattoo While Married to a Stripper

Side Effects:

Story:

Emily Taylor, a clinically depressed 20 something year old, goes through an extreme stage of depression when her husband, Martin, is released from prison. Her psychiatrist prescribes her pills which have a very disturbing effect on her and affects the lives of everyone around her.

Review:

Side Effects was for the most part, a very dark and dramatic psychological thriller with almost no happy moments. If you were to observe carefully, you would be able to count the amount of happy scenes on one hand. For those about to cry "spoiler!" watch the trailer and tell me what I spoiled. With that said, I think this is one of Steven Soderbergh's more noticeable works and actually provides the message that sometimes (prescribed) drugs don't help people get better.

What I liked the most:

1. It's an actual psychological thriller.

Most people never try to make their films very psychological, even if they're making movies which delve into that; all you see in The Shining is Jack Nicholson with an axe yelling, "here's Johnny!"; and in Fight Club Tyler Durden doesn't even realize he was the soap maker until the very end.

What I like about Side Effects is that everything about it is psychological. Everything that happens has to do with the side effects of certain medications, as well as how drugs can break someone down. The entire movie gives you the feeling of being almost physically thrown from your seat. In a good way.

2. Rooney Mara and Jude Law's performances.

Very rarely do you actually feel like actors in movies aren't the actors, but are actually people who have a camera aimed at them. In Side Effects, Rooney Mara and Jude Law both give what I think are their best performances yet. They're genuine and authentic, making one feel like the movie is more documentary than scripted.

3. The music.

The best way to describe the soundtrack is that it's purposely disorganized. Each song makes each scene feel more chaotic than it would have if no soundtrack was in Side Effects, and while watching the movie, I felt that the soundtrack added the necessary chaos to a story that was already very well written.

What I liked the least:

1. Everyone else's subpar performances.

Channing Tatum and Steven Soderbergh have collaborated on Magic Mike, so I assumed that Tatum would give Side Effects his all and do an amazing job. Unfortunately I was thoroughly disappointed with not only Tatum but Catherine Zeta-Jones as well. They have a few moments where they shine, but the rest of the film they seem to lazily act their parts out. Very disappointing.

Who I recommend Side Effects to:

EVERYONE! If you have a brain and you like movies that tease your brain then watch Side Effects. It's worth the $12.50 at Cineplex. Landmark sells tickets for $8 to $10, depending on what time you watch a movie. Half price on Tuesday for both theaters.

Super short ranting time!

So lately we've gotten some decent to amazing films that are just overall good, but I've noticed something worrying. Every year there's more bad movies than good, and that ratio is steadily climbing.

Don't get me wrong, there are a few awesome films making their way to theaters at some point or another this year (Star Trek, Man of Steel, the next Hobbit, Iron Man 3), but as you've noticed, all those movies are based off of something or another.

What happens when the source material is tapped dry? Will film makers end up making reboots of reboots of reboots of adaptations? It's happened already with Batman as well as Spider-man, so I'm confident it will keep happening more and more often.

Hopefully there are still a few original films that come out, but I'm starting to doubt that.

Koji Shiraishi, pick up the pace, we need better horror films. The same goes to you guys too Rob Zombie, Ang Lee, and David Fincher.

Warm Bodies!

Warm Bodies:

Story:

R, a zombie in the post-apocalyptic United States of America, falls in love with a human and realizes that love is the cure to the zombie virus.

Review:

First off, no sarcasm intended with that story summary, as that is actually what happens. I liked Warm Bodies. It's a very odd and very romantic film, though the nearly necrophiliac themes were slightly uncomfortable.

What I liked the most:

1. For once, a unique story.

There aren't many zombie films that try to have a unique story. Most of the time zombie films are about survival of the fittest and shooting the undead in the head.

This one actually had some slight Romeo & Juliet influence that was very evident. A zombie falling in love with a human, while both groups are opposed to each other. It was a pleasing change from the typical zombie horror stories that are usually generated.

2. Comical soundtrack.

Soundtracks are necessary for any and every film. Les Miserables needed the soundtrack because it told the story, Pixar films need to sound like Randy Newman is singing about the characters, and any slasher film in general needs to have some scary suspenseful music with the outro being either metal or hard rock.

Warm Bodies has a comical soundtrack, used to make light of the serious setting and make some scenes humorous instead of intense.

3. The main character.

R is a zombie, but not just any ordinary zombie. He is a zombie that has thoughts and emotions. He's a humorous zombie.

Again, something not scene often in the zombie horror genre.

Who I recommend Warm Bodies to:

Oddly enough, romantic comedy types will enjoy this one, same with those who like zombies in general. Zombie horror enthusiasts will probably hate Warm Bodies if they watch it.

Bullet to Stallone's saggy-vein head, as well as that movie with the British Vin Diesel

Bullet to the Head:

Story:

When his partner is brutally killed, a hitman goes on a killing spree to get revenge on those who wronged him.

Review:

While Bullet to the Head isn't one of Stallone's better movies, it certainly does have its moments. Humor is mixed in with the endless amount of blood and fists that mix together to create Bullet to the Head.

What I liked the most:

1. The action.

Nothing defines an action movie quite like, well, the action. And the action in Bullet to the Head is pretty awesome. Fist fights are raw and intense and gun fights have near endless amounts of blood. Very entertaining.

2. The humour.

There is some true raw humour in Bullet to the Head, which helped lighten the tension in some scenes. Some offensive humour, and some less-offensive, but overall great.

3. Stallone.

While his slurred speech is starting to become an irritation to listen to, Stallone is at the top of his game. He's aggressively badass yet human at the same time. Basically staying true to Stallone form.

What I like the least:

1. Stallone's slurred speech.

I know this should be more of a personal dislike than a movie-oriented dislike, but I can't take an actor seriously when he sounds like he's drunk in every scene. That is possibly the most annoying part of the whole movie.

2. Plot pacing.

This is becoming a serious problem in action movies, when the directors and writers just decide to throw everything in with no regards to pacing. Everything seemed scattered and all over the place. The story was linear, but it kept spontaneously going from fast to slow to fast to slow.

Who I recommend Bullet to the Head to:

Anyone who likes action films.

---

Parker:

Story:

After a robbery goes awry, a professional thief is left for dead on the side of the road. Seeking retribution, he goes after the group that cut him off of his profits.

Review:

Finally a Jason Statham movie where Jason Statham isn't always Jason Statham! This is also one of those films that's actually more than the trailer implies.

What I liked the most:

1. Jason Statham's non-Jason Statham-ness.

Statham has a very limited acting range, as one sees from a lot of his movies, so it was refreshing to finally watch a movie where he changes his style just a bit, and goes outside of his range even if it's just for a few mere moments.

2. Every actor/actresses other than Jennifer Lopez performance:

I know J.Lo was going through a rough patch during the filming, but every other actor outdid her performance. Even Michael Chiklis, and I'm not a big fan of Chiklis' 'acting'.

What I liked the least:

1. The story.

Even with some eccentric characters, the story was just a bit too typical for my tastes. Sure, there were moments when it shined, but there weren't a lot.

2. Jennifer Lopez:

Again, I know she was going through a rough time, but she's been an actress for long enough that she should be able to put aside her personal life long enough to make it through filming a movie. It was disappointing since she's been a good actress in previous films.

Who I recommend Parker to:

If you like action movies that aren't dumb but aren't too intelligent to be a run-of-the-mill action film, then Parker is the movie for you. Jason Statham does a really good job in this one.