Sharktopus

The basics 

Sharktopus is an American movie with came out in 2010 and was a made for TV film by the Syfy channel. Sharktopus is a horror, science fiction, monster movie which is mostly set Puerto Vallarta in Mexico. The film was directed by Declan O'Brien, written by Mike MacLean and stars Eric Roberts. This film is about sea, sun, military genetic engineering, a father and daughter relationship and wonderfully bad CGI.  

What is this film about?

The film starts off with a pretty good montage of Santa Monica, California and then we get introduced to two random blond beach babes (aka BBB) as they discuss the important issues at hand, to swim or to text? One of the BBB’s decides to go for a swim where the other doses not due to her profound augment ‘in the ocean, there’s fish out there’. As one of the BBB’s is taking a dip, a shark (and yes just a shark at the moment) starts to take an interest in her. Soon she is swimming for her life, until big jaws, I mean sharktopus grabs the shark and her life is saved.

After this we find out that sharktopus is a military project called ‘S 11’ and was created by a group called Blue Water. It was made as the navy’s next super weapon. In an attempt to impress a Commander they send S 11 to try and stay close to a civilian boat but not to harm it. As you would expect it goes wrong. The boat propellers damages the device with controls it and due to this S 11 is now free to do whatever it wants, and S 11 wants to kill. Now Blue Water has to hunt down this super weapon which is 50% shark, 50% octopus and 100% deadly.  

My views on it

In the wonderful world of B movies, they have brought us some amazing things of the years. Such as a 50 foot woman, a giant blobs, aliens that snatch are bodies and in 2010 a half shark, half octopus creature.

In 2009 there was a B movie which was called Mega Shark vs Giant Octopus. Due to its popularity it was not long before people wanted to jump on the band wagon and capitalise and this new found fame for sharks and octopuses. So the good people at the syfy Channel got there foot in the door and created this film which only need half of the CGI budget. When I first heard about this film I was not expecting anything more than a good giggle, some amazingly bad CGI and a bazar creature. I must say it brought all that and more. Now I am not saying this is a great film but for what it is, I loved it

When it comes to bad, B movie horrors, this film, for me tick all the boxes. It only takes 3 minutes and 25 seconds until you get to see sharktopus, so right from the start there is action and an awesome sea monster. With a film like this, which only survives on action and an awesome sea monster it is good to get it in early before the audience start to pay any attention to the plot hole in the story line or the bad writing. Also with this film there is great sense of honesty with it. There is a whole scene in which they basically says that this a bad film and I loved that. In this scene, two random characters have heard a report about sharktopus and class it as a hoax, in which they joke it could be somebody making a film. One of the characters says they would watch it and the other ridicules them by saying ‘that’s because you’re easily amused. I’ve seen you mesmerised watching a frozen burrito rotate in the microwave oven’. So for me it seems like the people who created this are saying ‘we know this film is bad and it was rushed and we are sorry, but look there’s a shark with tentacles what can walk on land, isn’t that awesome’. And because of this I can forgive it flaws and its mistakes and I can just enjoy the film.

In this film there are a few gems which I did expect as well. A few of the death scenes are done well and made me laugh. I found Eric Robert performance to be good, the directing and editing was alright and you can tell he had fun with it, like split screen styles of framing they used every now and then.      

All in all if you are looking for a fun B movie horror this is your film, if you like low budget monster movies this is your film or if you need something to headline your next bad movie night then Sharktopus is your film.   

Favourite Quote 

Captain Jack: ‘I repeat sharktopus wants our virgins.’

Rating 3/5

Forged

The basics   

Forged is an American film which was made in 2010. Forged is an action, drama which was filmed and set (well it never says in the film that it is set here but it never did not say as well) in Scranton, Pennsylvania. The film was directed by William Wedig and he also writes the film with the star of it Manny Perez. This film is about unattainable forgiveness, fatherhood and revenge.  

What is this film about?

The film starts with are protagonist, Chuco getting out of prison, as he has just done eight and a half year for the manslaughter of his wife. As soon as he is out of the walls, he is picked up by his old gang and taken back in to their arms. They treat him with a display of a man being beaten and then shot to test his loyalty and because he pass’s, he then gets booze and pretty girl to shag in the stalls of a bar’s toilets. Then he is given is first assignment, to drive some car to some place. Little did he know that it was a drug drop off. With 50 grand in his pocket from the deal and being pissed at his gang for sending him on a job, when he has just got out of prison and only one strike away from being in there for life. He decides not to go back start away but to go get some apple pie. By an off chance his homeless teenage son walks in, who witnessed the murder of his mother and mutters the words ‘You killed my mother. Now I kill you.’        

My views on it

When I got ask to review this film I was thinking ‘Great an indie, low budget, American film. That’s right up my street.’ Boy was I wrong. When it comes to the idea of independent cinema, I must admit I do look at it with rose tinted glasses. There is a small part of me that automatically thinks that because it is not a mainstream and not made for the masses that it is already going to be good. But it’s nice to have a reality check now and then (and by that I mean this film) to remind me that independent cinema can me just awful as well.

In this film there seems to be a lot of plot hole, things that just don’t sense and just lazy or bad writing. For example, in this film the main character is Latino. Now like a normal person I was thinking there must be a reason why the main character is Latino if they have set the film in Pennsylvania, where there population is only just over 5 present Latino or Hispanic (yes I researched that). And the answer is no. there is no reason at all in the film why this character is Latino. They don’t even reference the fact that he is Latino as well. All they did is at they gave him a Latino name and that’s it. The main character might as well been from Kazakhstan and called Eugene for how much it matter to the film.

The film is meant to be about Chuco redeeming himself and making this bond with his son. But from the start you see him watch a man die, get drunk, shag a random women in a bar’s toilets and rob 50 grand of his gang which he made in a drug drop off. And the only reason he try’s anything with his son because he seems to have money at the time and because he bumped in to him in a restaurant. So because of this I don’t like Chuco and his actions don’t seem that genuine and this makes a flaw in the whole concept of the film. So it’s not really an ex-thug and his son, finding a way to forget the past and trying forge a relationship together. Its more still a thug and his gay for pay, homeless son being together because the father feels guilty and the son goes with him because he has money and wants him dead.  

And there many more reason why this film is bad …..

·         Terrible dialog

·         Really bad and very simplistic editing.  This is what happens when you let the director edit the film as well.

·        And beside one or two of the actors the rest of the performances were very poor.

So all in all I would not recommend this film. On paper the concept seems thought-provoking and deep, it’s just a shame that this film is riddled flaws and bad writing which ruin it.  

Favourite Quote 

Guy (Actor Dan Teachout): Why do you think they let him out so early? He cut a deal.

Rating 1/5

The Kid with a Bike (ordinal title: Le Gamin au vélo)

The basics   

‘The Kid with a Bike’ is a Belgium film that came out in 2011. It is a realistic drama that is set in Seraing, Belgium. (French spoken part of Belgium) and was written and directed by the Dardenne brothers (Jean-Pierre and Luc). This film is about rejection, parental figures, choices in life and the paths that we take when we make them.

What is this film about?

The film starts with the main character, Cyril a boy of only 11, repeatedly try to call his father’s on the phone from the children’s home where he is only meant to be staying temporary.  Everyone there is trying to explain to him that his father has left but in disbelief of this, he plans on escaping and running back to his father’s old apartment to see him and to get his bike. After a few attempts he manages to escape and get to his father’s old apartment block. As the children’s home workers find Cyril, and try to take him back, in his last attempt to stay there he holds on to a random woman with all he’s got, but eventually they break him free from her. To prove to Cyril the horrible truth they let him take a look around at his father’s apartment, only to find it empty.  

Later on back at the children’s home, Cyril gets a visitor and it’s the lady (Samantha) that he held in the apartments. She has come to drop something off for him, his bike which she brought off somebody who claims he brought it from Cyril’s dad. Still in disbelief that his father is would do something like that he presumes that it must have been stolen. Due to this act of kindness Cyril asks Samantha if he can stay with her on weekends and she says yes.  

My views on it

In all parts of this film (story, characters, editing etc.) there is something I like to call a beautiful roughness to it which makes the experience of this film feel more real and because of this it connects with the audience on a deeper level. For example the reason why Samantha fosters Cyril on the weekends is not explained. In most films this motivation would have been explained because they would want something to justify it, they would want A, to clarify B, so that everything is explained, Luc Dardenne comments on this in an interview ‘We were adamant that the audience would never find out why Samantha is drawn to Cyril. […] We didn’t want the past to explain the present.’.  So there are things in this film that are not explained, the editing is not really seamless, the camera is a bit shaky, but this creates that beautiful roughness. Due to this beautiful roughness it goes against most cinema norms (mainly Hollywood) and it almost stops feeling like you are watching a film and it becomes more of a gate way into these people’s lives. When you start viewing it like that the characters become more real to you and you can really connect with them. Because of this connection you have with the characters and the highs and lows they go through, this makes a film that really pulls at you heartstrings and for a drama that’s a good thing.

The acting in this film I must say is amazing. Cécile De France who plays Samantha is perfect for the roll and pulls it off ‘to the tee’ but the star of the film has to be Thomas Doret who plays Cyril. His acting quality surpasses his years and his portrayal of a kid going through this situation could not have been done better. It almost seems like the Dardenne brothers found a kid going through this and just put a camera in front of him without him noticing.  

I would recommend this film as it is moving, powerful and an emotional roller-coaster where you do not just watch it, you experience it. You can definitely see why this won Grand Prize of the Jury at Cannes.    

Favourite Quote 

Guy Catoul (Cyril’s father): ‘Don’t try to see me again’

Rating 4/5 stars  

Midnight in Paris

The basics   

Midnight in Paris is an American film which came out in 2011. It is a romantic comedy which is set in Paris and was written and directed by Woody Allen. This film is about romance, art, writing, wanting to be born in a different time, Paris, and time travel.

What is this film about?

This film starts off with a wonderful montage of all the iconic places in Paris. In this montage we see Paris in the sun, the rain and at night and this set up one of the main questions of the film to the audience, what setting do you think Paris is at its most beautiful?

We get introduce to are protagonist (Gil) as he proclaims his love for this city and his wish to have been in Paris in the 1920’s with all the famous writers, artist and to be in the rain. Gil is an American who has spent his literature career writing for Hollywood movies but now wants to see if he is good enough to write his first novel. On a trip to Paris with his fiancée (Inez) and her parents, one night after some wine tasting Inez goes dancing with some of her friends and Gil takes a night walk around Paris to clear his head. After getting lost and sitting on some steps a bell chimes that it is midnight and Gil is picked up by an old fashioned car by people dressed from the 1920’s.

My views on it

American comedy at the moment seems to fall in to only three categories crude humour like ‘The Hangover 1 and 2’ , randomness like ‘Family Guy’ or popular culture references like ‘South Park’. So when I watched this film it was great to see humour that did not have to be crude, random or just a references to be funny. There are references in this film but it’s all to 1920’s artist and writers, not just whatever just happened in the news. So Culture references are used, so you can say that this element of modern American comedy is presented but since they are mainly used when the film is set in 1920’s Paris you are not really able to class this as being popular. The comedy in this film is very witty, subtle and clever and for a film that came out in 2011 this is very refreshing to see.

Two of the main things I like about this film are how clever and charming it is. For example Gil finds himself talking to Salvador Dalí, Man Ray and Luis Buñuel in a bar and he starts to talk about how he is from the future. They just seem to think its normal and Gil reply’s ‘Yes, but you're a surrealist! I'm a normal guy!’. Jokes like that make this film so clever and if you understand them they are really funny but if not, the film is so charming that it can get away with. I must say I know a bit about artist’s and writer’s in the 1920’s so I did get most of it, but there where a good few things that went over my head but I did not mine at all. If you look at the character Paul, he talks about art and history and he get it wrong every now and then. For me this reflects that we are not meant to know about everything we see in this film as it does not punish us for not knowing. Besides as you watch you start to learn more about this time and the artist anyways.

One of the most surprise things I enjoyed about this film is actually Owen Wilson for his acting. For the role of Gil I think that Owen Wilson was the perfect cast, as they needed a charming, classic romantic almost cliché American writer and he is great at this role.

Favourite Quote 

Ernest Hemingway: If it's bad, I'll hate it. If it's good, then I'll be envious and hate it even more. You don't want the opinion of another writer.

Rating 4/5 stars  

Contagion

The basics   

Contagion is an American film that came out in 2011. It was directed by Steven Soderbergh and written by Scott Z. Burns and came with a star studded cast including Matt Damon, Kate Winslet, Jude Law, Gwyneth Paltrow and more. This film is about outbreaks, fear, people’s lives, journalism and people just not washing their hands.

What is this film about?

The film starts on day two of the outbreak as we see Beth Emhoff, a business woman on a layover at Chicago airport as she has just came from Hong Kong and going to Minnesota. She seems to have flu like symptoms as she talks to her Chicago lover on her Phone as she waits for her flight. Next we get a slightly patronising montage scene with good long close ups of ill people all across the world touching things just so we know as an audience member that ill people still touch things and this is how a disease maybe spread.

After this we go to Minnesota and we see the disease spread as Beth’s son (Clark) gets pull out of school for being a bit ill like his mum. Then the family takes a turn for the worst as Beth start to have seizure and when she gets to the hospital she unfortunately dies, even though you would not be able to tell this by her husband’s (Mitch) reaction. It seems more like he just got told his car had been clamped not that his wife died. After this Mitch’s step son (Clark) dies and yet again Mitch’s reaction seems off, as he is a bit angry, but more like he just dropped his laptop, not that his step son just died. From here the infection spreads.

My views on it

Well at the start, besides some bad acting and being a bit patronising it had a lot of promise. The almost documentary style of filming was interesting and engaging at first as we follow people lives and how the disease spread. Also with the main protagonist (Beth) at the start of the film dying as well as her son it showed that this film was willing to be edgy and taboo. Sadly after this the film stops being good.

Due to the style of which the film was made (editing, cinamtography, ect), it started to grate on me after a while, it seemed like it did not know what it wanted to be. Part of it wanted to be a normal film and the other half wanted to be a documentary and this gets really annoying as the film drags on. As they tried to integrate these styles it did not seem to work. An example of this is when they are looking through some CCTV footage at a casino, they portray that they can see only what the cameras see, but the footage we see is a stylized version; as we see it like we are there in the casino and not the cameras on the celling. They should have just shown us the CCTV footage as it would have been and not make a stylized version of it for us; as that breaks the reality that the documentary style try’s to create.

After the beginning, the level of interest that this film sets up starts to decreases very quickly. This is because nothing interesting really happens and nothing is made to be dramatic. The pace of the film becomes very slow and as nothing is made to look really dramatic and it becomes monotone, just riding along on the same level of just ‘kind of interesting’. And that is what the film just become, just kind of interesting. Because it sticks to this one level for the rest of the film its gets really dull and it drags out. The film is only 1 hour and 46 minutes but it felt about 2 hours and a half. Even my friend John said after the film ‘that film was long, over 2 hours’.

As I am getting over my limit in the review I am just going to list a few over issues that I did not like, quickly for you.

*The film jumped from character to character all the time so you could not make a connection with them really.

*Acting was bad

*The disease itself was dull

*No twist

*The Ending was insulting and not needed

Favourite Quote 

Alan Krumwiede: It's a bad day to be a rhesus monkey.

Rating 1.5/5 stars   

Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy

The Basics 

Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy is an American film which came out in 2004. It was directed by Adam McKay and written by Will Ferrell and Adam McKay. It also stars Will Ferrell in the lead role as Ron Burgundy himself. This film is a comedy which is about the local news, a male dominated world, street gangs, feminism, quotes and good looking hair.

What is this film about?

In the 70’s there is one local news team in San Diego that is miles above the rest and this is the KVWN-TV Channel 4 Evening News team and there lead anchor is none other than Ron Burgundy. After being given the status of highest-rated news program in San Diego again, they go back to the same party they do every year to celebrate. This time there is something different. There Ron meets a beautiful, blonde woman who has no idea who he is and does not fall for his charm. The next day we find out that the woman at the party is Veronica Corningstone, the new ambitious newswoman at the station.

Will her ambition change this male dominated world and as the men see her as fair game, will any of them woo her?  

My views on it

Every time I use to think about this film I was able to pull out all the best quotes from it and look back on it with happy memories. If you have watched this film then I bet you have quoted it in your everyday life; from saying to a girl ‘I want to be on you’, when you wanted to descried your feeling towards lighting features ‘I love lamp’ or just when you want to talk about figures ’60 % of the time, it works every time ‘.

When I watched this film again recently I am a little sad to say that it didn’t reach up to the expectations that I had of it in my memory. Yes all the funny quotes where there and I did giggle at them but that was about it. In my recent viewing of this film I was trying to look for something deeper than just the jokes but there isn’t anything really. Yea you can say that there is the theme of the "second-wave" of the Women's Movement that happened between the 1960’s to the 1990’s in this film with Veronica trying to become a success in this man’s world. But in this film it seems like this theme is there more so they can make sexist comments then have a strong insight or opinion on this political movement .so when you look past the clever quotes and funny situations there isn’t much to this film, but is it enough? Mmmmmm……. Yea. I think so. This film isn’t going to leave you thinking or change your view on anything but as a comedy it fulfils its number one objective, it makes you laugh. The comedy in this film is great and after the film you will still be laughing at the quotes that are rolling around your head and you will be singing afternoon delight as well.

As for the characters they are a reflection of the film itself, there isn’t much to them but they are well acted and funny. The film did have a great comedy cast with Will Ferrell, Steve Carell, Paul Rudd and more and this did add a lot to the film.

So if you want to see some great comedy performed by a good cast and that’s about it then this is the film for you but if you wanted to watch something with any kind of depth then best look somewhere else.

Favourite Quote 

Ron Burgundy: Oh Audrey - I look like hell! I got bags under my eyes. What's that? Well if you were a man, I'd punch you. Punch you right in the mouth. That's bush. Bush league. YOU HEAR ME? AUDREY! LOOK AT ME! I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Alright?

Rating 3/5

Watership Down

The basics  

Watership Down is a British film which was made in 1978. It was first a novel by Richard Adams and was published in 1972. It was directed by Martin Rosen and it is about tyranny, freedom, bravery, death and violence.

What is this film about?

At the beginning we get to meet two rabbits, Hazel and Fiver. Fiver starts to have visions of a soon coming doom to their warren and they go to tell their chief. The chief barely pays attention to what they have to say and dismisses their advice to move all the rabbits to somewhere else. Because of this Hazel and Fiver and a few more rabbits run away together to find a new home.      

My views on it

Do you remember when you were about seven and you sat down to watch a cartoon film about rabbits (rated U), then after the film you cried and then you had nightmares for about two weeks? If you do it was this film, Watership Down.

Coming across this film again (now in my twenties) I was interested to see my adult view on one of the most horrifying films in any kids childhood. In three simple words ……….. I loved it. Now I am able to appreciate this film on so many levels but I can still see why this film would be terrifying to a young audience.  In most cartoons there is this feeling of hyperreality, for example in Roadrunner you can watch Wile E. Coyote blow himself up or fall of a cliff numerous amounts of times and still laugh because it funny and you know he will be fine in the next clip. Watership Down does not really have this feeling of hyperreality, it all feels very realistic and when two of its main themes are death and violence it’s not hard to see why this film could be scary for a child. As an adult the sense of reality in this film is great, knowing that the consequences for the characters are real it makes you care for them more and it makes it more dramatic when it happens. Also because the theme of death is about as subtle as a brick to the face, it gives most of the film a wonderfully haunting feel as you watch.

Also there is underlying meanings that you can pick up.  One that most people seem to talk about is its view on totalitarian regime, mainly looking at Nazism (looking at the Efrafa warren and General Woundwort). This meaning wasn’t put in by the writer ‘Well, I don't think there's any pro or anti-society in Watership Down, it's simply a tale. […] It's only a made-up story, it's in no sense an allegory or parable or any kind of political myth.’ (Adams. R, 2008). He just wanted to write a story about bunnies, with knowing that it just makes me like it more.  But art is up for interpretation and if you wish to read into the political themes then go for it.

The animation in this film itself is another thing I really enjoyed about it. It is a bit too old to have had CGI and it didn’t have the budget of Disney but what they have done I think is great. The artwork in this film seems hand draw and painted and you can tell a lot of effort went into it. It is almost like watching a painting and there is something charming about that.

I would really recommend this film, especially to the people who seen it when they were young so they can watch it again and this time enjoy it. Just don’t show it to your kids.  

Favourite Quote 

Narrator: All the world will be your enemy, Prince with a Thousand Enemies, and when they catch you, they will kill you... but first they must catch you.

Rating 4/5