Change Your Image
orcadiansmeghead
Reviews
Hangar 18 (1980)
80's Kids Dreams!!
God, I know now its a B movie/TV movie but some people might find it hard to believe this didn't just get a nationwide cinema release in the UK we also got trailers for it during the adverts on ITV!
I was taken to see this by my parents when I was 7 years old and as a kid I was obsessed with aircraft and UFOs - at 50 years old now I can see the film is absolute cheese but it was so exciting at the time. I've obviously matured over the decades and have different views on such things now but a flying saucer? With humanoids onboard? And advanced technology? I nearly wet my pants when I saw this at the cinema in 1980. Not for the modern youth, certainly, but it was a nice story at the time which stayed with me for a long time. We can all dream!
Take it for what it is. 1980s TV alien stuff.
The Martian Chronicles (1980)
Never gets stale
Just watched this entire series again, but for the first time since 2012. I watched the original 6 week airing of this series back in 1981 when I was 8 years old.
Its really stood the test of time. For anyone who has read the short stories this mini series was made from, much like 2001 A Space Odyssey you have to expect there are a few liberties taken with the screenplay, especially with 'The Silent Towns', which was more accurately portrayed in The Ray Bradbury Theatre.
Rock Hudson gives a great performance as Colonel Wilder who helps stitch everything together, although he is the only A lister present in the cast and TMC might not have been a success without him.
Awesome scenes, landscapes and score help elevate this into far more than a TV series, and the full 4 1/2 version is well worth a binge, even if - based on our current knowledge of Mars - the scenarios are a little incredulous today, whereas 2001 A Space Odyssey was essentially put together by Kubrick and a scientist and is still quite believable today.
If you love science fiction and dont mind the fiction this is definitely for you.
I'm 50 and I'm still spotting TV actors in this from back in the day.
9/10.
Texas Red (2021)
Don't be put off by the low budget, if you just need 'a watch. I thought it was ok.
THIS IS NOT A WESTERN, AND DOESNT PRETEND TO BE SO STOP COMMENTING THAT IT ISN'T A WESTERN! WE KNOW!!
Seriously, there's references to WW2 in this movie so stop your whining and appreciate there's some people on planet Earth who still live and who were around when this movie is set.
That aside, I'm normally quite brutal with low budget films (especially the seriously hard-core 'no-budget-whatsoever) English and Scottish movies that now pollute the movie-buffs outskirts.....
That said, I actually sat through this short film without a break and enjoyed it. It's about as predictable as they come - the actors were ALL unknown to me (as an ignorant Britisher) and 60 seconds into the film you KNEW exactly what was going to happen to everyone involved.
Poor Red.
I stuck with it and it was pretty good as far as LB movies go - it gave a good representation of the era, the actors and actresses were all fairly competent given what they had to work with and it most certainly did not look like a totally amateur iPhone movie. Some people might say 'did you really need to watch the film to know what was going to happen?'
Well yeah. Only thing I've noticed with low budget movies like this, and this IS a criticism - GIVE THE MAIN CHARACTERS A BACKSTORY! In this film there was absolutely none whatsoever. Not even a belch on anyone. Not even the main protagonists.
Other than that, I'd watch it again in the future. Its certainly not Roots or Mudbound, but I wish genuine success to the writers, directors, actors, and all involved. As I say I'm very unforgiving but this gets a thumbs up from me.
6/10.
Mersey Blues (1999)
I appeared in this documentary
The camera crew who started following these various Merseyside Police 'detectives' could not have imagined what they were going to chronicle when they started this project.
Useless, clueless mostly senior bobbies, most of who had got to where they were because of who they knew, not because of intelligence or experience, and spent most of their time up their own backsides.
The first episode detailed the obscene corruption between an extremely experienced and well respected detective chief inspector, who willingly and stupidly tried to scupper a case he was investigating on behalf of some serious Liverpool criminals, putting himself at risk, and putting the safety of innocent officers at great risk.
I was personally involved in that particular case and 90% of the utter criminality and dangerous behaviour he got up to are not detailed in the episode, but he was a villain who ultimately went to prison.
Other episodes - A vice team receive a tip off from an informant, which results in them following a car around for almost the entire episode and at the end finding nothing in the vehicle. Half of the senior staff in that episode were sacked for corruption and taking bribes although that was after this episode aired.
Another episode involved an infamous murder from Kensington and the detectives who investigated it. The officers who arrested the suspect didn't even know the Caution and were as thick as two short planks, and ultimately the suspect walked free from court.
Its absolutely fascinating watching these programmes over 20 years later (look on YouTube most are on there now) to see how completely inept and idiotic most of the participants made Merseyside Police look, at a time before smartphones and Internet were popular.
Oh, and I was one of good guys.
Worth a watch. 6/10.
Cell (2016)
Badly done from the outset - not even for fans of the book
Hello. I am a big fan of Stephen King and a massive fan of the Cell novel which I read in 2007. I have waited years for them to make a screen version of this and have had to endure seriously bad variations on the story such as The Signal to name but one.
I am well aware of how difficult Stephen King's long stories convert to video compared to his short stories, and definitely the way to go is to make them into mini-series in order get everything in. The Stand is a good example of how to do this properly. Although not everyone is a fan of The Stand it as pretty well done and starred some famous faces of the time. The Langoliers was another. The Langoliers book scared the heck out of me and although the mini series was often difficult to follow because of the complicated story they managed to get everything in - especially the 'silence', the main scary part of the story.
A great example of a short story which made the extraordinarily successful jump to screen was The Mist, in my opinion the best that has yet been done.
(I have clicked the box for spoilers) The problem with The Cell is that there is far too much going on in the book to fit into a short motion picture. Yes folks, that book (if you've read it) that took a week to get through is reproduced here quite poorly, in one and a half hours.
Clearly, to shorten it down back stories would obviously have to be changed or shortened down but come on, removing them completely and having no back stories whatsoever for most of the characters makes it difficult to bond with them.
There are scenes in the film where the characters seem to be very close to each other, and have a strong bond with each other but the movie moves at such an accelerated pace even someone just casually watching this would struggle to find the close relationships plausible as none of the people portrayed have had long enough to get to know each other. The main character, 'Clay', portrayed here by John Cusack is an extremely likable character in the novel. In this adaptation we barely get to know him.
Because the novel mostly consists of what Clay is observing, thinking or dreaming, therein is the explanation for the distinct lack of dialogue in the film, and what exists is difficult to understand. Also, the gaps between big events are not filled in for the movie and you will struggle to work out how long the events in the movie will have actually supposed to have been going on for.
The Raggedy Man, ONE OF THE MAIN CHARACTERS IN THE STORY is changed from a black man into a white man, and his name has been changed to The King Of The Internet. Sorry to disappoint everyone but the words Raggedy Man aren't mentioned once here. The novel isn't that old and you might wonder why on Earth they did this as the internet is mentioned in the novel so it's hardly that they need to bring the story 'up to date'. This is a contemporary story set in the last decade and they didn't need to do this.
John Cusack, Samuel L Jackson and to a degree Stacy Keach are all completely miscast in this production. I do not know what possessed SLJ to feature in this poor film as I've rarely seen him a bad film but he just seemed so out of place here (in the novel he is white, and is also gay - something not mentioned or explored in the movie)
The novel consisted of several main settings where the characters settled for longer periods. One important one is missing (I won't tell you which one but it spoiled the film further)
Oh dear. I'm ranting so much you, the reader, will probably be having problems following what I am saying. Well, that is the film right there.
They should have made this into a mini-series. They should have had some more suitable actors. They should have stuck to the story like glue. It worked for The Langoliers and The Mist. They should have included the levitation and telekinesis elements. They were frightfully important to the story. They should have either ended it the same way as the book (open but you can close it in your mind) or ended it the same way they did The Mist (open, but with some closure). The ending in this was just ridiculous and got me no-where. It was a real WTFF ending.
Very disappointed. I initially would have said it was for fans of the book only but if you are a fan of the book you will likely be extremely irritated by the time the end credits roll, or if you haven't read the book you will be completely confused. I'd like to think someone else will have another go at this story within the next 30 years and do a better job. My rating, 3/10. Don't go into this with high hopes like I did. It wasn't a fun ride.
It Follows (2014)
Clearly low budget horror that is actually quite watchable
Lets face it, its probable you are not going to be buying this movie on blu-ray for £20 in HMV. Its more likely this will be picked up in Asda for a fiver. Thats where films like this end up in the UK.
That said, its pretty good as these films go. What is quite obviously a low budget film without (the need for) mega-special effects works really well thanks to a group of pretty good actors and actresses and it's great 1980s soundtrack. I've mentioned John Carpenter film scores in other reviews - this one sounds like it's straight out of Halloween 3! Really sets the scene for an hour and a half of doom, threat and a predictable but wholly forgivable outcome. If you know the movie series 'Ring' you'll know what to expect. Its all been done before in every decade but sometimes it can be pulled off without the need for frills.
The film dispenses with ridiculous blood and gore and relies on the 'threat' element from the do-badders walking around the neighbourhood of the film's setting. The make up on the creatures present seemed questionable at the start but when we got to the bit (spoiler alert) where a 7 foot tall Lurch-lookalike silent malevolent suddenly walks through a dark doorway, even I jumped out of my seat and decided blood, gore and evil sound effects were not actually needed.
Definitely a watch, but don't pay over the odds. This director and the films stars are all very talented.
Southbound (2015)
Awesome Retro Horror
Its very rare that I see a film that prompts me to put a review on IMDb, but sometimes, a film can be so unforgivably poor, so unpredictably mediocre or so unexpectedly great I can't help myself.
This film is the best horror I have seen this year so far (2016). There are few if any flaws in it - with some great surprises. The main surprise is the fact that the film stars 'some actors you've never heard of' and yet pretty much all of them play their individual roles brilliantly. They can ALL act and are convincing in their roles.
The film is a 'loop' horror. 'Loop' as in a popular format whereby a number of tales are told that all connect together in some way. In actual fact, all of the short stories in this film need to follow each other, but the loop could have started with any one of them. Its just so well done.
I went into this film completely blind and despite being a horror the 1980's John Carpenter style soundtrack made me beam. If there were no mobile phones or modern Audi A8s present the film could have been set in 1983 for all we know! Very clever storytelling that despite having a non-unique style had unpredictable outcomes at the end of each short. Very good. I loved it. Slight whiffs of 2005's 'Reeker' (Michael Ironside) and 1975's Race With The Devil in the mix here, but all reworked for a new decade with some old fashioned elements which make this a winner. Add to the mix a bunch of actors you won't recognise who all appear to have actually been to acting school at some point make this a worthwhile addition to your movie collection. If I rate a film here as 9/10, it is because I know I will watch it again.
Not for the squeamish - it's pretty bloody :D
Air (2015)
Not particularly good
Can I say first off, that my wife came into the room when I was about 30 minutes into this and I managed to convince her for 10 minutes that it was the new episode of the Walking Dead - oh how we laughed when she discovered my joke.
To save you all from watching this, I can sum the film up for you in a few sentences.
The guy who plays Daryl out of off of The Walking Dead takes a break from the series for about 15 minutes, and goes over the road to another studio where someone has set up as a 'delapidated basement plant room' set. Also, the main guy out of off of Amistad and whatever else he's been in does the same.
There, they play two scruffy air conditioning engineers who wake up six months out of cryogenic submersion (the Amistad guy managed to get through this without growing any facial hair whatsoever) and the two bicker and argue for 10 minutes before one locks the other out of the facility. Whislt outside, we get to see an alleged post apocalyptic city on the horizon (this 20 second scene was what most of the films budget went into so bear with me and make the most of that mental image if you would) The guy out of off of Amistad then tries to get back inside only to be shot in the chest by Daryl out of off of The Walking Dead but makes a frankly completely implauasble recovery and manages to get rid of poor Daryl.
The end.
If you want to watch this utter pile of pigs number twos, please go ahead and tell me all the action, necessary dialogue, special effects, plot holes and plot developments I may have missed, but I watched it all the way through without interruption, and wrote this immediately after. That's the film folks. It's been done before with almost identical formats, with other cheapo TV actors who may have also thought it would be a good idea not to bother getting a cut and blowdry for a movie this big as The Walking Dead image is more important.
I strongly recommend to anyone reading this who hasn't seen the film but doesn't believe me to go ahead and take the plunge. I guarantee you'll be wanting those 90 minutes of your life back. I know I do.
3 out of 10,and THATS being generous. Thanks for calling.
The Ex-PM (2015)
Very funny! (Review from a non-Australian)
OK, so admittedly my experience of Australian cinema and television is probably limited to the only things that I can remember when put under pressure - Mad Max (which probably isn't Australian, I don't know) Home and Away, Eden, Neighbours.. and Sons and Daughters. Really bad as I am a self certificated movie and TV buff lulz You may also see my experiences stem from the 1980's so it's been a while!
I came into this show after finding it by accident on MXQ. We don't seem to have access to Australian media in any other practical way over here :P - so in other words I was completely blind to the characters, the setting, and the actors. I have never seen any of them before, in anything.
...soooo from an ignorant Brit, here is my short review - this is the FUNNIEST sitcom I have seen in a long time. I have found every episode laugh out loud and up to now I have watched each available episode now five times, including ep5 which I saw last night. I cannot wait for the next and hope this continues into a second season.
Andrew Dugdale was running a country the size of Australia? Jeepers! His character is very similar to Alan Partridge in a number of ways, although Alan Partridge is more of a cartoon character in that there is probably only a handful of people who are even remotely as disgusting as him - Andrew Dugdale is funny without thinking he is being so, and very straight played - and very believable as a normal guy even as a comedy character and I have met a number of people like him throughout my life. He is educated but only in a specific area, so the basic things normal people might take for granted he is a little ignorant of. He cannot cook, he cannot do his own tie without looking at a Youtube video, his ability to communicate with and listen to people are limited - he is self centered, ignorant, not all that arrogant although he does seem to think he knows his place even though he's probably a little lower than he thinks! There are a very small number of main characters in this show who I will not go into, who all provide Andrew with his situations and gaffes. All very funny, especially his driver, Curtis Curtis Curtis lulz, with slight brain damage and metal plate in his head whose role in life is to keep Andrew's car egg free.
I must add, that the incident which prompted me to actually put a review on here was from Episode 4 - when Neil Blanchard his old arch enemy in politics is having a 'snooze' on an inflatable li-lo in Andrew's pool. Andrew's conversation with him where he tells him some light home truths followed by a greeting card he presents to him then reads to him, in which he tries to right some wrongs from the past is very moving and changes Andrew's character for a moment into a normal human being. Best part of the whole series so far - it doesn't matter that before, throughout and shortly after the entire swimming pool scene, Andrew is completely unaware his poor nemesis isn't actually asleep and is quite dead! Very well written comedy with brilliant characters and I know I will be watching this for years to come.
I've actually read a few reviews for this show across the web, all from Australians most of which seem to be a bit mediocre so I thought I'd give a foreigners perspective on it. Certainly I'd recommend everyone give this a run. Despite being about an ex prime minister, its not a particularly political show and can probably be enjoyed by everyone, young and old. My only gripe with it is the episodes are far too short at about 25 minutes. I'd prefer far more input during each chapter! 8/10
Essex Boys: Law of Survival (2015)
The Daily Sport gives it 5 stars - so it MUST be good.
OK, first off, my posting as far as I can see complies with the site rules. I have looked back at the original review I did for this and have decided to edit it slightly.
My original was fair, balanced, constructive and above all else, truthful. I posted a footnote on my original review stating that I'd love to hear other movie buff's opinions on it. I am not so self centred and arrogant as to not actually return to see if anyone else had seen it and that is why I have returned regularly and now see in two days flat hundreds of ratings have suddenly upped the film's average score from 4/10 to 7/10. I bet it goes up even more - very quickly, and I think we all know why and how.
As long as gas stations have bargain bins, people will always make these zero-budget crass films and demand normal people pay them for it. But if you try to manipulate things by offering people sirloin and then serving them pig swill, you will alienate people from anything else you ever do ever again and people will permanently switch off. Careers can be ruined, punters will be annoyed and all signs will point to fail. If anything people should be paid to see this film as it is hard work to watch.
Essex Boys - Law Of Survival is one of the worst films I have ever seen. The 'actors' are clearly not real actors, the story is unbelievable, the script is so bad its almost funny, the direction is non-existent and although I managed to get through it, I doubt most normal people with an IQ over 80 and a lack of an espresso machine will. It's absolutely dreadful. OK, there you have it. I will never watch anything by this director ever again and will purposely avoid any films I come across in the future that have any of these 'actors' in because the way this 'movie' is being portrayed by it's undeservedly high site rating (probably by people involved in it who are alarmed at the amount of negativity it is receiving) is completely and wholly dishonest.
Oh, and putting a 5 star review on the cover of the DVD from the Daily Sport is ridiculous as well. The paper ran an article a while back saying a double decker bus had been found on the moon, so who are you and they trying to kid? Avoid this like the plague, unless you are really drunk, high or just love late night freesat horror-channel films, which is the only station on the planet which would broadcast this tripe, because that channel doesn't care that no-one ever watches it. It's not even entertaining by accident.
Do you really think you can stand this up next to Rise Of The Footsoldier? You can't, and it shouldn't be taking advantage of Carlton Leach's reputation to try to make people think it will be anywhere in the same league. ROTF doesn't even get 7/10 on here for heavens sake.
Oh, check out the reviews on this site for a film called 'Muffin Top - A Love Story' to see a slight variation on how and why individuals manage to post multiple positive reviews for a truly dire film. It only takes a click.
Avoid.
Into the Lion's Den (2011)
Dire
(Just so you all know, I am straight) Blimey, I tell you all what, I have seen some truly dreadful films in my time, some that were so bad they were actually funny - this unfortunately does not fall into that category. The acting is totally abysmal from the outset and a man's erect helmet 2 minutes into the film did not lift MY spirits in the slightest, nor did the slightly flaccid one 60 minutes in. The three main guys in this film all act like they are making this film themselves for laughs with a camcorder - appalling dialogue, script, story - the lot - if that wasn't bad enough, the other characters in this film such as the hotel manager, Frank the barman and his female accomplice are without a doubt, the most HAMMY actors I have ever watched, far worse than anyone The Young Doctors could have ever employed.
I found this film by accident after looking for the Argentinian film 'Lion's Den' - I will definitely be more careful in future when searching! This move robbed me of 75 minutes of my life and I WANT THEM BACK!!! (I have to watch films all the way through before passing judgement)
For me, this film raises a serious question regarding 'special interest' movies such as this pile of pig's number twos, and that question is this - do gay men and lesbians watch films like this and think they're good just because of the homosexual content, or do they like me also see how utterly atrocious this is from beginning to end? Jeez.....
You want a really good film with homosexual content? Butterfly Kiss with Amanda Plummer, or even Awaydays with Stephen Graham - both at the total opposite end of the cinematic spectrum to this.
Who Needs Enemies (2013)
Excellent
I have not read the other reviews of this film (there are currently only 2 others) but I was losing my faith in these 'typical' London gangster films until this just came along...
Many of the actors in this you'll have never seen in anything else which makes them far more believable than they would be otherwise. They are all very good actors too - far better than the usual Danny Dyer copycats. .....some seriously dangerous and warped characters in this film too and I can tell you there are people out there just like these...
The film is about as violent, bloody and predictable as you'd like, (predictability is not an issue) but it is presented as a serious of chapters, shown in non chronological order very much like Pulp Fiction. For anyone saying it is a rip off of Pulp Fiction, well, I have seen few films in the last 20 years which have been presented in a similar fashion while actually being able to pull it off. Each time a chapter ended, I was praying the end credits were not about to appear!! 10/10
The Strangerers (2000)
Good Science Fiction FUN
I have FINALLY managed to get hold of this gem (but don't you dare make me tell you how) after not seeing it since it's first screening here on Sky One way back in 2000. I am pretty confident that this has never been repeated and has never been released on video or DVD.
It is a comedy sci-fi story about highly advanced (if apparently a little slow witted) vegetable based extra-terrestrial agents on a secret mission to Earth, written by Rob Grant (one half of Red Dwarf) Although it's British, it seems to be set in some kind of parallel 1950's USA. The actors all have English accents (apart from Docherty) the sets look vintage American and the vehicles are all Russian. Sounds crazy? It is also quite interesting because I think this is the only series other than Blake's 7 that Paul Darrow and Gareth Thomas have starred in. Paul is fantastically sinister as usual!
I would have difficulty comparing this to just about anything else out there, but it's basically a fun story with some fun characters and some good special effects for a TV show made 10 years ago. It has become a 'cult' classic mainly because it has not been on here for nearly 10 years and people have to search hard to find it, but also because of it's association to Red Dwarf. I would recommend anyone to check it out if you can - but to all those who give this bad reviews - it's a fantasy, so don't take it too seriously!
Phase IV (1974)
Not a kettle of boiling water in sight...
This is another of those films I can remember from when I was a kid and I recently managed to acquire it off ebay - 20 years on, it's nowhere near as good as I remember it being.
The story is 'vaguely' kick started, by a 'cosmic event' (there's another extra film-crew member in the credits for 'weak story development') which makes collective ants become super intelligent. Ant species who used to war with each other have ceased rivalries and are now working together. The thing I wanted to know throughout was, TO DO WHAT EXACTLY? You never find out what they want. Nigel Davenport and his sidekick travel out to the desert where bizarre ant activity has been noted, and begin to study the ants from an impregnable igloo shaped laboratory. Probably the most chilling scene in my opinion was when the two scientists visit the giant square in the crops (like a square version of a crop circle) a result of the ants chomping away.
This film was not very scary quite simply because you don't know whether to fear the ants or like them. All you know is that the ants want people to leave the area so they can get on with their hijinks - but you don't find out whether they are really baddies. It ain't a sci-fi because the 'cosmic event' explanation is too vague to be properly taken into account. It is deffo more of a chiller. TBH the flares, daft hairstyles, tight shirts with big collars and Nigel Davenports unnaturally big facial hair-do freaked me out more than the ants! Did you notice that there are only six actors listed in the credits? Yup, that right - SIX, and you won't see any other human beings in this film at all. Not even in the distance! This is a plainly obviously low budget film which is a bit watchable because you probably won't have seen one like it. I can't think of any anyway. The filming of the ants is pretty good, they must have done months and months of filming before they had the shots they needed to stick in the film. You may well say to yourself 'how the Hell do they get the ants to do that?' over and over, but it is all quite simple. You will also notice that the film makers sacrificed millions of innocent lickle ants to make the film too, so animal rights peeps STAY AWAY! Good for novelty value, but you may not watch it more than once.
White Chicks (2004)
Excellent - funniest film I have seen for a while hee hee
Wow - first off, I read the reviews on here just before sticking this one on, and was dismayed and shocked to see the amount of people slagging it off (all for the exact same reasons too), and generally giving it the thumbs down.
I get the impression that the white chicks make up the Wayans bros wear is disappointing to a lot of people because they aren't attractive enough to fancy. Have you guys read what you're writing on here and looked at yourselves? This film ain't real, and criticising the make up the guys were wearing cos you didn't think it was realistic enough is a bit daft, I think. It's only a story, a comedy and in my opinion a great film. No doubt the people who don't like this will also not like I'm Gonna Git You Sucka and Don't Be A Menace To South Central? (two more cool films) Or is it that people are afraid that if they say they like this film some lefty will say they are racist towards black people or some supremacist will say they are racist towards whites? Wow, I know a guy who said Dumb And Dumberer was racist cos the Chinese girl in it was called 'Ching Chong'?! Jeez.
I laughed my socks off at this film and I don't care who knows it. It's funny. There's no point repeating the story, but I will repeat this bit which is reflected in a few places on this site - Latrell is the funniest character in this film and every time he appeared I was cracking up! You need to get this film to see his rendition of 'Thousand Miles' Ha ha. It's cool. Forget what people will call you, and watch it alone if you have to! It's only 4 quid on ebay!
The Keep (1983)
Can F. Paul Wilson turn in his grave even though he's not dead?
If you haven't seen this film yet, PLEASE get hold of the book and read it first. That way, you will be able to REALLY see how terrible the film is. If you see the film first, it is unlikely you will want to read the book because the film is a low budget B movie (and thats being generous) that self-explains why they won't bother releasing it on DVD.
I am still amazed that the likes of Ian McKellen, Gabriel Byrne, Scott Glenn and Jürgen Prochnow were in this film - they are totally out of place in this dire waste of time - 1983 or not. I appreciate that this is over 20 years old now and certainly Byrne had only done a few films up to 1983 but they were all still well known then. They could have got away with Prochnow and a few unknowns to keep the cost down. Then the money saved could have been spent on perhaps another 20 minutes worth of film?
Captain Klaus Woermann IS the main character in the novel. 'Glenn' is just in the background for most of the book and he doesn't really get in your face until near the end. This film has Scott Glenn listed first but if you weren't to watch the opening credits you would have difficulty deciding who the main character is.
The novel is adhered to well for about the first 10 minutes, then 90% of the proper story is skipped over. One of the main parts of the storyline in the novel is the rivalry and differences between unwilling stormtrooper Captain Woermann (Prochnow) and the completely and utterly evil Major Kaempffer (Byrne). Their differences mirror the differences between Molasar and Glaeken, intentionally. That part of the plot is not represented properly in this film.
There is a sex/love scene in the film that lasts about 10 minutes (about an 8th of the film!) It was unnecessary, stupid, and wasn't in the original story. It exists because Mann couldn't think of anything interesting to fill the gap.
'Molasar', the REAL baddie is practically skipped over in the film and there's no attempt at explaining what he is or what his real relationship to Glaeken is. Consequently, there is no depth to him or Glaeken. Molasar was the thing that came out of The Keep for goodness sake, but he isn't focused on at all really. When I read the story I absolutely ploughed through it because I REALLY wanted to know what Molasar and Glaeken were. I found out in the end! It isn't explained properly in the film though.
Scott Glenn's contact lenses are ridiculous. His character had bright blue eyes in the book, but they really didn't need to go this far with Glenn's bright blue obviously fake eyes. I have no idea why that bit was stuck in the film, but hardly anything else was?
Tangerine Dream do a couple of tracks in the film which really are brilliant but even they can't save this pile of dog's number twos. If you want my advice, get yourself a copy of 'Music From And Inspired By 'The Keep'' by Tangerine Dream, and stick it on while you read the novel. It will be a far more enjoyable experience.
Sorcerer (1977)
Why 'Sorcerer'?
I only saw this film cos of the Tangerine Dream soundtrack (in actual fact most of the tracks off the album aren't in the film) and was surprised that it was quite a good film. I haven't seen or heard of the original Wages Of Fear but am now on the lookout for it as it is apparently infinitely better than this version and this version is great. Special effects are quite good too. The scene where they are trying to get the truck over the broken bridge was a killer. Only thing is, when I ordered Sorcerer, I had no idea what it was about. In 'The Exorcist', what is the one thing you would expect to have in the film? An Exorcist perhaps? Yeah, I have no idea what possessed (ahem) Friedkin to call it Sorcerer, even towards the end I was still expecting a sorcerer to jump out. Anyway it's available on DVD although region 1 only, and it's worth getting. I bought mine on Ebay, brand new and had it shipped to UK from US for $20 all in. Oh, and the Tangerine Dream soundtrack is absolutely fantastic too.
Colossus: The Forbin Project (1970)
If you haven't seen this and don't like nightmares, don't watch it
I saw this film when I was 11 and although I didn't fully take in what was going on when I saw it in 1984, I did a few days ago. Now I am 30, I have just seen it again. And just like 20 years ago, I am having a few odd nightmares. The story? Man creates a super intelligent completely indestructible, learning computer, built into an absolutely, totally impregnable mountain, and allows it to take over the nuclear defences of the USA. It's program? Protect the citizens. This films scariest issue is that it really is a chilling account of 'what could happen', the computer designed to protect man, does so in the most efficient way it sees. It controls man. How? 'OBEY ME OR ACTION WILL BE TAKEN' says Colossus. What action? Oh I dunno, just a few nuclear missiles being fired at targets around the world, which in effect brings man to it's knees. Without 'war' (which the computer describes as 'wasteful') man can develop to a higher level, and under Colossus's strict conditions which will be adhered to or pay the penalty, man will be assisted in solving the mysteries of life and science, and will also eradicate famine, (no doubt religion) hatred, poverty, crime, and all other problems that now, in real life, are 'causes for concern'. 'YOU WILL NOT ONLY COME TO RESPECT ME, YOU WILL COME TO LOVE ME' says Colossus to Forbin, it's creator, at the end. However, the nightmare issue is, with Colossus FULLY in control of man (it puts man in a 'do what I say or I will (AND IT WILL) blow you all up, I don't care which'), and with absolutely, positively no way to shut it down, EVER, man will never be free, and will be prisoners on their own planet FOR EVER. Thats it. Forget space travel too! I have not seen this film for so long cos it ain't ever on the TV and it is not available on DVD or video round here. I ended up getting a laser disc player to watch it, and it is one of the most thought provoking and nightmarish films I have seen in my life, with probably the most grim, no-win, unhappy ending I have ever seen in a film. If you have a head for heights, then go ahead. And with hardly any actors in it you will have ever seen in any other film, it is truly beleiveable and will have you on the edge of your toilet.
Epoch (2001)
Eh?
A half a mile high stone thing appears in the desert in Buthan, 100 miles from the Chinese border don't you know, and their government invite the US to have a look at it. I think it is fair to say that this would be unlikely to happen in real life, but there you go. Is the tower here to destroy mankind or save us? And can we communicate with it and find what it is? The film has fairly reasonable special effects and the CGI are acceptable, but it could have been so much more, but falls flat on it's face as there is no real end to the film - there is no explanation at the end of what the stone tower is or what it's on Earth for. It looks like a good film up until about five minutes into it, when you will start losing interest rapidly. Hurrah for Brian Thompson - (member of the 'bit parters' association and David Warner's right hand man) - he plays yet another meaty soldier with half a brain cell, who starts off as a baddie but becomes a goodie for no reason at all quite frankly halfway through the film and spends the latter quarter reading a bible with his gun pointed at his colonels head. However, in this film he gets to say more than twenty words and shows what a versatile actor he really is. Look, if you like good, well put together sci fi romps, give it a miss. This is truly terrible.
The Nostril Picker (1993)
A Must See - For less than a fiver!
Let me tell you this. This is THE video nasty you need to get. The acting is the worst I have ever seen! I saw kids in the remedial class at school put together better films than this in GSE! The special effects genuinely give you that real image.... - of someone, at the side of the set, throwing ketchup across the place!! It is the worst made 'horror' movie I have ever seen, but then don't all real movie buffs get off watching Plan 9 from outer Space, and Glen or Glenda? Edward D Wood jnr had his failures, all of which ended up as cult classics in the 21st century, and if you are into this kind of rubbish, The Nostril Picker is now on general release in the UK, in the 'His Masters Voice' stores, in the 'under a fiver' budget range. The basic storyline is that a layabout weirdo offers his stash to a local hobo living in a box behind a bus shelter, in exchange for the hobo's secret knowledge regarding a voodoo chant he heard in an underpass some time, that once recited, turns a man into a female of his choice. Whether he picks his nostril or not during the chant is unimportant. He can then go on using his female 'cloak' and murder whoever he wants without the authorities discovering him - unless he is photographed. If he is, his real identity will be discovered. Oh, and if he recites the chant too many times, he will go crazy. Sounds crazy? It is! Beyond belief. It is truly so poorly made, you can not watch it without the edges of your mouth curling upward. I have never seen the end of this film, but I have put it on so many times, I have lost count. You won't get to the end because you will fall asleep - laughing. And, you will have a DVD title, no-one else you know has! The Nostril Picker is truly a triumph amongst bad taste films. Did I mention that the sound is so poor you will swear you saw the kid recording it on set with his tape recorder? Or that the end credits have the usual - Gaffer, Best Boy, Make Up, AND - Weak Story Development.? Get this film. Most serious film-ers love to hate it - or hate to love it. I love it and it is the pride of my DVD collection!!!