That poster is ph-ph-ph-phallic... hur hur hur

Hee hee. It's true, though. Nearly everything is sexual in a Bunuel film.

I'll have to check this out I'm behind on Bunuel films I think I've only seen Belle Du Jour, Viridiana and Un Chien Andalou

30 Minutes or Less (2011)

An okay-time passing comedy, not as good as I expected.

>>: B-

Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011)

Some may find it surprising but I never been a fan of the Planet of the Apes movies & TV series. Actually I haven't seen them all properly (even the 1968 original, which started it all). The thing is when I was a kid (I don't know why but) I didn't like the idea of Apes are being behaving or dressing like humans; yeah..it'd be definitely interesting to see them 'talking' but in general monkeys or apes should act in their natural way. For example, Kong or Joe Young...they have a good deal of 'humanity' in them but at the end of day, they are what they are[:D]. Anyway, after all these years this film (which they are saying an origin story for a new Planet of the Apes franchise) have successfully able to change my view. This is year's best so far and Andy Serkis deserves at least some nominations in coming award seasons for 'portraying' the role of Caesar so brilliantly, IMO. The best thing is they have came with a simple but beautifully intact origin story of POTA & kept it like that way and that made the movie so amazing to follow & watch, I found nothing overdone or exaggerated in this movie in terms of story & character development, sfx action sequence etc. I'm very...very much looking forward to see the sequels in coming years.

>>: A

Fright Night (2011)

It wasn't as funny or enjoyable like the original but not a bad remake also.

>>: B

Warrior (2011)

A pretty good drama about a 'fighter family' but I was expecting the exact opposite result in the final game that the film came with & delivered an "everyone's happy" or feel good finale, which is very usual for this kind of film.

>>: B+

they kept it more realistic to mma more than going over the top like a van damme movie, why i thought this movie was a good story.did you like the rocky movie cus i thought this movie was on that sort of wave length but with boxing.

I'd definitely recommend this one and The Exterminating Angel.

Oh, I almost forgot. If you thought that poster was phallic, check out this one:

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/...aL._AA300_.jpg

exorcist 2...bored me,specially after the first one but have exorcist 3 to watch next made from the same guy as the original,looks much more better

I'm not going to argue semantics about what a martial art is or a martial art movie but I agree its a sport movie not a chop socky flick.

I really enjoyed the fight scenes especially Tom Hardy's sparring for money one but I am an MMA fan and was a practioner/fighter so I'm glad they went the realistic route (unlike Never Back Down).

Caught Warrior last light. Thought it was solid. Well executed and for it's running time didn't drag. Even though the story was familiar and fairly predictable they pulled it off by having great well acted characters. I was expecting more of a old school tournament flick but wasn't disappointed. The final fight was great (although it did seem kinda weird [spoiler]he plowed through everyone including the stronger fighters until the last fight.... but that's the unpredictable nature of the tournament I guess)[/spoiler]. Never watched much MMA but this has made me keen to check more of it out.

About your spoiler, Elvis.

Yes, that's one of the things that annoys me about the sport.

The smaller guy who spend the entire match lying on his back defending himself can actually win the fight. I find it utterly boring to watch.

GET UP AND FIGHT, MAN!!!

Haha I hear you but the tactical approach seems pretty interesting.

Immortals.
This movie seems to be getting a lot of negative feedback, but I thought it looked alright in the trailer, we got cheap tickets to a 3d session so we went along.
Holy fuck, what a voilent movie...makes the often-compared 300 look particularly tame. Personally I thought the fight scenes were a bit closer to the "Spartacus" series, all the same though yeah, gruesome.
The storyline was ok, and while a lot I've read has people picking it to peices, I think they're quick to forget the quality of other films of this kind.
It's not astoundingly well written though it's entertaining, fairly solidly played by the range of actors involved, and personally I thought Rourkes "villain" was the best role he's played in years...
I actually LIKED the 3d this time, it usually annoys me but nope I thought it was done particularly well, probably comparable only to Avatar.
It's an epic two hour long battle, I was entertained.

The Devils (1971)

http://i252.photobucket.com/albums/h...ul28/devil.jpg

I've heard a lot about The Devils throughout the years, but nothing I heard about it could prepare me for the experience of seeing it.

Visually this film is a constant barrage of the most perverse and striking imagery imaginable. It paints a savage portrait of pain and suffering. The entire design of the film is absurd and over the top, the sets are outlandish and reflect the insanity of that period of time.

A scathing review of the disturbing potentialities of organized religion, The Devils is unlike any film I've ever seen. Endlessly disturbing and hallucinatory. A spectacle of atrocity and intolerance.

10/10

^ Fuck yes.

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-DmBYZ89uhg...er-337x500.jpg

Held off watching this because I was dubious and really didn't want to see my childhood pissed on... after all this was one of the films that steered me into becoming a horror fan. Colin Farrell was better than I was expecting but whoever decided to turn the character of Peter Vincent into a dipshit Goth Russell Brand should have their ass kicked, the film would've been almost passable if they ditched that dumb idea. The remake really lacked the subtlety in balancing the mix of horror and comedy finding itself coming across as moronic for most of it's running time. Big dumb disposable Hollywood fare all the way here. Chris Sarandon's cameo got a laugh out of me and despite a few cringe worthy moments it is a fairly entertaining film but ultimately forgettable and not a patch on the classic original.

I'll give it a watch but never really expected it to hold up to the original

^ sounds like the usual remake story

just watched scanners and original planet of the apes for first time ,catchin up wiyh a bit of history

Weirdly enough it's got a lot of really positive reviews so I was expecting something a lot better.

I kinda liked it - I didn't expect much and was drinking cider which is prety much the best state of mind to approach Hollywood films these days.

Thanks I will :)

Graveyard Disturbance (1986)-Lamberto Bava film that unfortunately doesn't seem to really know where to go with its premise. Not unenjoyable by any means as there are some memorable scenes. For fans of Italian Horror only I'd reckon.

http://i1199.photobucket.com/albums/...3rwffckgbe.jpg

http://i1199.photobucket.com/albums/.../220px-May.jpg

2 very good movies, love object was very creepy if not watched i highly recommend.

You should know better when it comes to remakes. There's only a few that are any good and really only one in my opinion that was better then the original.

Never heard of Love Object. Sounds interesting plus i like Desmond Harrington from Dexter so i'll give it a shot.

The Thing (2011)

Totally agree with Elvis, not as darker or tense as the original but a fairly done entertaining film indeed.

>>: B

Straw Dogs (2011 & 1971)

Most of the great things about Sam Peckinpah's original cult classic is missing in this horribly miscast, shallow & ultimately pointless remake. Yeah, it's easily understandable that it's very hard for today's any young actor to fit in those characters that's been done by such brilliant actor like Dustin Hoffman or even Susan George's Amy. And particularly in compare to them, the convincing job that they done in the original movie, there is no chemistry between this new version of David & Amy.
After the remake, I watched the original again (after a long time since saw it first years ago) just to refresh my memory. And it's again great to see how remarkably Susan George portrayed Amy's role in the film, particularly in that exceptionally chilling rape scene. All of Amy's expressions...that unimaginable experience she was going through is missing here in the remake. No offense but Kate Bosworth (with flat boobs) is clearly miscast for this role.
Now, about James Marsden's David...it seems that he didn't see the original or have very little idea about who did the David Summer's character and how well did in the 1971 film; otherwise he wouldn't agree to do the role, IMO.

Anyway, only good things about the remake is it's got good production value & few nice shots here & there.

>>Remake: C
>>Original: A

Cowboys & Aliens (2011)

Main plot/idea: interesting,
Cast & premise: Great
but...
the overall story & characters: uninspired.

>>: C+

I havent seen either of The Straw Dogs movies and i really have no desire to. If the thing people talk about the most in a movie is a rape scene, thats not really a movie im dieing to see. By the way that's not a dig at you Roshiq. Pretty much everyone i've ever heard talk about the movie mentions the rape scene.

forget the rape scene, it's a very good movie u should give it a go. and i def recommend on love object.

that's weirdly funny of you, man. Before drawing any conclusion, you need to see that movie (original one) to understand the point why 'people' are like to talk about that particular scene, IMO. Rape was never been so much 'horrifyingly exciting or excitingly horrifying' on the screen before!

Moreover, it's just not about that scene only...the whole story/film delivers far more than that, you should check it out at least for the performance of the cast...particularly it's Hoffman's one of the best ever.

I'm not drawing any conclusions, i just dont like rape scenes in movies and that's the only thing i ever hear about that movie. Seems kinda sick to me that people talk about it so much. Once again, not judging, more of a broad generalization of it i guess. It's not like i've made a decision about the movie and have deemed it bad or anything. It's just not a movie i'm really excited to see or one i need to watch right away pretty much for those reasons.

Haven't watched Straw Dogs in years. Brilliant film.

Oh yeah remakes never top the original for me I just expected something more well put together after reading the positive reviews.

LOL :D

2012

i know this movie was a pile of crap but i found it quite fun.

Silent Night, Deadly Night
http://i1101.photobucket.com/albums/..._V1_SY317_.jpg

Started my Christmas horror movie marathon tonight and decided to start with this classic. I said awhile back in my review of Sint that evil Santa movies are a hard sell and i still hold to that even with ones that are just killers dressed up as Santa but unlike Sint i really like this movie. It's cheesy and a little over the top but that's all i was expecting and looking for so i enjoyed it.

And by "the original" you mean the remake, right?

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...9tpppLNFd_peR5

The Rite

To be honest I thought this was gonna be just another REALLY SLOW run of the mill exorcism movie, but I wound up really enjoying the film. 3.5/5

http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:A...pP9ZfIftK02l31

The Organizm

Not horrible but probably nothing Id watch again.

2/5

John Carpenter's 1986 film with same title.

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/...500_AA300_.jpg

Just finished it. I cannot deny that I liked it, maybe not as much as Carpenter's original remake but yeah. The music was hauntingly reminiscent of Carpenter's remake as well, and so were a lot of the scenes. The "prequel" tries to follow a different route by mixing Hawks' original work with Carpenter's remake, but marked similarities with both, the original and the remake are only too glaringly evident and go a bit against this film. What made Carpenter's film disturbingly eerie was the fact that many things were left unsaid and for the imagination of the viewer; the prequel shows almost everything, right up to the point where the story goes forward into the 80s masterpiece. The climax was a nice little touch, and the clever juxtaposition of the "beginning" with the end titles is a good addition to the continuation as well.

The performances were okay, although Mary Elizabeth Winstead as a dedicated scientist is a bit hard to swallow. The casting of many members of the Norwegian base is pretty much spot-on. The CGI was decent, but there was more than one instance when it stood out as a piece of CGI, which goes against the flow of the film. The director does a competent job maintaining the atmosphere of the film throughout, and should be commended for trying to do so. Unlike RZ's "Halloween", "The Thing" (although being a remake OF a remake) pretends to be a prequel and actually carries it off as well.

All in all, it's a decent little companion piece to Carpenter's remake of Hawks' original from the 50s. Be sure to stay for a bit as soon as the end credits show, to see that small and special end which leads to "the beginning."


* * *

walking dead ep 1 season 1. Pretty good

Frontier(s).

Thought is was very good (rated 4.5/5.0 stars).

Not as good as Inside or High Tension, but haven't seen Martyrs yet.

How does Martyrs compare to Frontier(s)? I heard Martyrs is way better, but Frontier(s) is more violent.

Great write up on The Thing ____V____!

I didn't think much of Martyrs when I first saw it but once I had some time to digest it all I liked it a more. It's got a lot more depth to it than Frontier(s) (and the rest of the similar themed films - Wolf Creek, Eden Lake, Turistas, etc) and is definitely a better film.

I thought they were equally violent really but Martyrs has more unsettling violence whereas Frontier(s) is almost comical/OTT in it's approach to it.

It's the only stand out film of it's type for me. A twisted dark, unsettling and thought provoking flick.