Monster Hunter (2020)

Holy pop tarts what have we here?? Another videogame adaptation AND directed by Paul W. S. Anderson??!! You're yanking my chain? Wait, and Anderson's wife Milla Jovovich is the star?! Again??!! How did I never hear about this until now? Until two years after the fact? If this was the mid-90's to early 00's this would have been EVERYWHERE! And probably would have done quite well too.

So this movie is based on a Capcom videogame series that I have never heard of where you run around battling monsters I guess, I dunno. So obviously I cannot talk about game accuracy or anything as I have no idea. As for the plot it's your standard videogame spiel really. A group of modern-day soldiers are accidentally thrown into another dimension where monsters exist and they have to try and find their way home via various subplot macguffins. You know the type of thing here, reach an ominous tower by crossing a deadly desert. Defeating big dragon-type beasts. Learning how to fight a specific way in order to defeat said big dragon beasties. Gaining the trust of various oddball locals in order to get to places so they can get home etc...

The first thing that struck me here was the visuals and special effects. There has clearly been quite a lot of effort put in here as everything looks really good. The location shooting pays off as you can actually believe the characters are in another dimension and not just a Californian desert. The combination of real-world locations and CGI works nicely here. Add to that the creature effects are also top-notch in my opinion. It's easy to think this could be a cheesy-looking videogame adaptation but no, the various otherworldly creatures all look really decent. Alas the main creature the goodies battle tends to look like any old regular dragon that could easily have leaped out of any swords 'n' sorcery-themed flick, but it looks good.

One thing that did bug me was how easy it was for bad-ass Jovovich's character Artemis to beat said monsters. We are led to believe these creatures are almost legendary and impossible to kill, hell they look it. The desert dragon thing is meant to be almost impossible to kill, yet Artemis manages it after a few hours of training from Tony Jaa's Hunter character. I mean, if he knew how to kill these things so easily, why hadn't he done it himself already?? He is the 'monster hunter' after all. It's also kinda tiresome and yawn-inducing that Artemis is such a Mary-sue character but let's be honest here, what was I expecting?

The best monsters are easily the goosebumps-inducing spider creatures that swarm all over the desert when it gets dark (naturally). These things essentially act like spiders by cocooning their prey and inserting larvae into their hosts. You then get the inevitable sequence of a cocooned soldier getting overcome and eaten alive with these spider hatchlings.

Character wise the US troops are as you would expect. A typically diverse little team of guys n gals that all act exactly as you expect them to. Jovovich is doing her best Ellen Ripley here but in all honesty she does a solid job and works well within the movie. Other characters that pop up within this outworld are obviously taken from the videogame judging by their appearances and ridiculously oversized absurd weapons of choice. Ron Perlman's character looks like the epitome of a Japanese anime character, as does Tony Jaa's character and his sword. Overall it's a typical casting roster for this type of flick. A mishmash of various cult classic/pop culture names in order to gin up more attention.

For a videogame adaptation with lots of popular CGI action that you'd think would be aimed at a younger audience, the movie is actually quite dark at times. Well the first part is at least. They certainly haven't held back too much with the violence and gore and the movie is better for it. But overall the general theme here is pretty mixed. What starts off as a semi-decent 'Aliens' type clone, quickly descends into a slightly hokey Mortal Kombat-esque clone and ends up with a decidedly iffy Lord of the Rings-esque finish. Heck they even leave it completely open for a sequel, a little too open really. Why can't we have actual complete movies with a start and finish anymore?

Don't get me wrong this isn't exactly a bad movie, far from it, it's actually not too bad all things considered. There is a lot of issues here and the entire thing is unbelievably generic taking tonnes of elements from other (better) movies. But for a mindless action monster fest, it's definitely a good outing in my opinion. Definitely a surprise, especially in the visuals department.

7/10

In Search of Darkness III (2022)

The search for Darkness continues and presumably ends with this third part of this quite epic documentary into the 80's horror film genre. Whereas part one covered the more famous and infamous horror flicks, and part two covered the more obscure; part three seems to cover everything in between from the familiar to not so familiar (for me at least).

By now anyone watching this documentary will be well aware of how it plays out and prepared for the onslaught of information, any newbies out there buckle up! Once again the background information to every aspect of all these movies comes thick and fast like a rollercoaster. As before the doc is presented in a year-by-year format and each movie is given its own little segment which in some cases doesn't really delve deep enough, unfortunately, leaving you wanting. But in other cases you get a nice dollop of info that is just enough to satisfy. Whether or not you already know about this information is obviously the key factor in how pleasing it will be. 

As I said in my review of the first two parts, the issue these days is background information for movies is (and has been) easily available either on DVD, Blu-ray, or YouTube etc...for years. Unlike the old days when behind-the-scenes footage/docs/interviews etc...were like gold dust, these days it's beyond common practice. Heck you could even argue that people aren't that bothered anymore with the advent of streaming. Actual physical copies of movies that would have extras aren't the mainstream anymore, strange as that may sound. So essentially, there is a possibility that with many of the movies you may well have seen or heard the information before, although that is less likely with some I'm sure.

Despite this the overall celebration and sheer scope of this series (and this third part) are undeniably impressive. The amount of horror actors, both famous and obscure, that are interviewed is impressive alone. The writers, effects people, horror experts/historians, directors etc...The snippets from all the movies covered or merely referenced. The larger context chapters that dig that bit deeper into specific aspects of the genre, specific actors, specific controversies etc...International horror movies and their effect on the genre. All here crammed into one documentary. I say crammed but they aren't really, this doc is over 5 hours long! But that isn't an issue either as it's perfectly fine to stop and come back another time. The segmentation of the series allows for viewings to be split.

There isn't a great deal to say here that I didn't say already for the first two parts. That's not a negative, it's merely because this is a continuation of the documentary and if you've been watching then you're obviously a fan and know what to expect. But yeah, this is a documentary on all aspects of the horror genre during the 80's and it's flippin' epic. If you like horror then this is for you. If you like some horror movies/franchises but aren't too bothered about horror overall, then you might find this a bit too much and could find yourself tuning out.

The question is, will this documentary carry on and dive into the 90's decade of horror? I hope it does as the 90's is now probably just as iconic for the genre with many true gems.

9/10

Red Notice (2021)

Well this was the most Hollywoodist of Hollywood movies I've been subjected to for quite some time. Not that I'm surprised really, I mean look at the cast, literally the most generic Hollywood A-list casting you could sloppily throw together without trying. Yeah these big names should easily bring us in some dough, story? Plot? Who cares, anything will do.

So what we have here is yet another James Bond-esque, Mission: Impossible-esque action comedy (even with some blatant Indy clonage)  with all the usual trimmings. Just take a look at this thing. We skip from one exotic location to another like a videogame. An artic fortress, a dense jungle, sunny Spain, tropical islands, a temple, an underground mine etc...All the while our three main characters, Dwayne Johnson, Gal Gadot, and Ryan Reynolds look super glossy and sexy. The entire movie is literally one super slick highly choreographed action sequence after another with terrible CGI effects and blatantly obvious greenscreen shots.

What's more, the action sequences are so mind-numbingly stupid and again so generic it's boring. Gal Gadot's character is obviously the best at everything because of course. Johnson is Johnson like he is in absolutely everything. Whilst Reynolds merely does his mind-mannered soft Deadpool comedy routine which is admittedly amusing at times but not original. Nothing here is original, we've seen all this before time and time again. The whole thing plays out and looks like a videogame for of pretty people with nice bods. And the entire double-cross surprise angle which occurs numerous times is not clever despite how much the writers and director think it is.

So yeah, cookie-cutter, run-of-the-mill, factory production line, wash rinse repeat etc...All these terms cover this overly unexciting mundane star-studded makeup-heavy bonanza. It's virtually 'True Lies' for 2021 except it rips off a multitude of other movies and franchises and has absolutely no edge to it, no kills, no blood, nothing. Painfully soft safe glossy fluff.

5/10

Muppets Haunted Mansion (2021)

 

Muppets Haunted Mansion you say? A nifty idea of Muppets in a haunted mansion scenario? I've always wanted to see a Muppet Dracula movie (following in the same literacy vein as previous Muppet flicks like Treasure Island, the Wizard of Oz and Christmas Carol), but alas what we have here is literally Muppets Haunted Mansion: The Ride (ala those special mini-movies made for theme parks).

This had potential, but alas they missed the mark again. Visually the movie is decent and it does capture all the famous elements of the classic Disney ride, but that's about it. Once again they have gone for a very silly spoof-type of approach with no proper story (much like the two recent modern Muppet movies).

Yes all your favourite Muppets are there and yes it is entertaining to a degree (if you can also look past the horrendously bad new voice acting of certain characters), but I YEARN for a proper Muppet movie with an actual plot...you know, like a movie should be. They have also incorporated far too many songs in the more recent Muppet flicks, this is no different. We just move from one famous ride scenario to the next with a new song, ugh!!

At the end of the day this simply feels like an extended advert for the actual Disney ride and not an actual movie (was it??). Still, at least it's better than the 'Muppets Wizard of Oz', yeesh! A far cry from the heights of 'A Muppet Christmas Carol' and 'Muppet Treasure Island'. What's the problem here?

3/10

The Suicide Squad (2021)

 

So here we are again with another superhero movie and this time it's a reboot. No wait it's a sequel. Is it in the DCEU? I dunno, who cares anymore!

'The Suicide Squad' is the second attempt (because the first didn't get through to Hollywood apparently) to make a movie about a gang of classic, or not so classic, DC villains. You could even call it the third attempt after 'Birds of Prey' which was essentially the same shit but with female villains...because muh diversity and representation. So what's it all about? Gang of supervillains are brought together to help a shady section of the government with a shady operation. That's it!

So the big carrot on a stick with this new movie (exactly the same as the first) is of course the roster of villains. The first movie roster was essentially crap bar Deadshot (and this was ruined with the casting of Will Smith), this second movie roster is somewhat better, visually at least. Unfortunately we still have to put up with the most overrated character and performances ever with Margot Robbie as Harley Quinn. Feck me I hate this character and spent the entire time (same as the first) wishing she would just get killed, horribly.

But apart from the useless character of Quinn (whose special power is merely being the Joker's bit of fluff) this time we have Rick Flag, again. Yup, same boring character and same boring actor in Joel 'not Robocop' Kinnaman. Bloodsport, another flippin' merc with gun skills. Haven't seen that before (Deathstroke, Deadshot, Deadpool etc...). Idris Elba looking like a tired middle-aged dad is Bloodsport. Peacemaker, another merc-type character just like all the rest and meaning there are two on the team, ugh! John 'I bent the knee to China along with LeBron James' Cena plays Peacemaker. The Thinker, a sort of crazy-ass equivalent to Professor X. Polka-Dot man, the gimmicky team member who they have made darker. Ratcatcher 2, a young who controls rats? What? And finally the token team monster in King Shark who admittedly looks cool but is ridiculous (and apparently impervious to bullets and falling from heights?).

Yeah so I totally get the gist of this movie don't get me wrong. I know this is a comicbook flick and it's not to be taken seriously, but seriously? Firstly the movie is exactly the fecking same as every other comicbook movie, especially the first one! Like come on people! They made another movie identical to the first literally to have another go and hope this time they sell more tickets. It's the same movie!!! Secondly, it's dumb as hell. You have the same problem from the first movie wherein some characters don't even need to be there. Why would you need a young woman who can control rats? Setting aside the inevitable deus ex machina moment of course, why would you need a pied piper? The Thinker does nothing throughout, literally. I felt Polka-Dot man could and should have been more useful with his polka-dot throwing powers but he barely uses them. And as I said before, King Shark looks cool but it is again rarely used and seems to be just there for the overall quirkiness of the team.

Oh I forgot about Weasel, a humanoid, mutant...weasel? Like what the feck is the story of this thing? And he murders children?? What. The. Feck? Is it me or was he stuck in just to try and ride the coattails of Rocket Raccoon somewhat? Albeit in a much darker and tragic way. You know what I mean. I actually found this thing to be kinda disturbing actually, and not in a fun way.

I just can't help but feel the entire plot of these two movies is cool in thought (probably works better in comicbook form), but just doesn't work on film. A shady government organization needs elite teams to help save the world from epic-level threats, so they use people who don't really have the right powers or skills to do so. Random mercs, marksmen, introvert polka-dot guys, a pied piper of rats, insane women who happen to be girlfriends of much bigger badder villains etc...Let's be honest here, almost all of these characters (in both movies) are in no way suited to battle the enemies they have to face. At least the Guardians of the Galaxy had space tech and a big powerful alien tree mutant. What have these Suicide Squads got? Regular guns, polka-dots, rats, javelins, people who can climb walls, a hungry fish mutant that might eat members of your own team...errr...baseball bats. 

I liked how they try to remain faithful to the comicbooks but again that causes some issues (for me). Like why the hell would Peacemaker be wearing a bright red shirt, sparkling white pants, and a shiny metallic toaster on his bonce?? Conspicuous much? And did Polka-Dot man actually need to wear a polka-dot patterned suit? Looked like something from a children's Saturday morning TV show. Yes I know what the arguments will be here and I fully understand them. This doesn't mean I think all the characters should be running around in black armour or whatever, but maybe just a touch of realism in some costumes to go with the dark realistic aspects of the movie. Just a touch.

Yes I admit this was definitely better than the first movie, but that ain't much to shout about. The opening sequence being a ruse was bloody obvious from the get-go seeing as we know those weren't the characters we've been told about for months and months. Good thing too because they looked even worse than the ones we actually got. The main villain they fight was...a space starfish...so there's that. Actually appreciated how original that was for once. Although it was just another 'large CGI monster destroying everything' finale (haven't seen that before...sigh!). 

The fact that the squad won the day via a literal tidal wave of rats that apparently had no issues with eating an alien starfish from the inside out, was a bit bizarre. Yeah I know they are rats and wouldn't have too many qualms about what they're eating but...yikes! And that many rats?

The effects were very good, unsurprisingly. King Shark looked very cool, very realistic, very scary. Some people's worst nightmare I'm sure. I wouldn't go anywhere near the thing. The giant starfish looked pretty sweet. A nice hokey throwback to sci-fi of the 1950's, in my opinion. Acting was fine, nothing special. The humour felt strained to me, reaching, trying to mine that Marvel gold but failing (not that I'm a Marvel fan). But as said the plot was throwaway trash. The concept has been milked to death and despite what you might hear there are zero surprises anywhere. It's all been done now people, the moment has well and truly passed.

Oh and in the end, after all that action, two of the characters you thought were dead, aren't. So there you go. Nothing mattered, no tension, no consequences, no one dies meaning they can come back again for the inevitable sequel which will inevitably be the same shit all over again (except that probably won't happen because the movie has tanked). I'm shocked! (I'm not shocked).

5/10 (Harley Quinn is a shit character)

In Search of Darkness (2019)

Well what can I say? This documentary is split into two parts and overall is over 8 HOURS long! If that doesn't tell you just how much it will cover then I don't know what will (covers lots!).

What is so impressive about this doc is that it covers almost every aspect of horror, every genre, every sub-genre, even videogames for a small part. Whether you're into the classic 80's bogeymen, Italian clones and rip-offs, horror-comedy, creature features, psychological stuff, mutants, the early blocks of torture porn, or the much-hyped controversial video nasties and apparent snuff flicks, it's all covered here baby.

It really is quite impressive just how many movies get covered in this epic feature. Obviously not everything but virtually a good bulk of it. Each one accompanied by interview sound bites from various people across the board such as makeup artists, the actors, the directors, writers, fans, reviewers etc...

If a movie isn't actually covered then chances are there will be a clip in here somewhere as a reference. The only obvious downside to all this material is quite simply not every movie is given the same amount of time. Some of the more famous and infamous flicks get better longer coverage whilst others are merely skimmed over briefly.

On the other hand, for minor horror fans like myself it's a goldmine for movies I've never heard of and have piqued my interest. Admittedly many of these flicks do look pretty terrible (they haven't dated well in all honesty) but there are definitely some that grabbed me by the ghoulies.

Interspersed throughout this massive highlight reel are segments where specific people are interviewed more in-depth. There are only about four or five of these I think and mostly focus on a few big players like Robert Englund, Kane Hodder, Tom Savini etc...

Again admittedly the info you get here will be either wickedly interesting or so-so. I say this because in this day and age if you're a movie lover (or fan of anything really) then chances are you'll have probably seen and heard much of the stories and behind-the-scenes info/footage from the various people involved. After years of DVD and Bluray extras alongside loads of other documentaries, retrospectives, and YouTube content most folk will probably have seen much of this all before. That was the main issue I had with the sister documentary 'In Search of the Last Action Hero'. There was nothing new, literally seen and heard it all before, multiple times.

So don't go into this expecting all new footage from behind the scenes or groundbreaking stories from beyond the grave, a lot of it is nothing particularly new, for much of the more well-known movies at least. As for the lesser-known titles chances are it's all new, for me anyway.

Overall it's the scope of this thing that impresses so much. The number of people interviewed. The number of clips used. The editing must have been a bitch! And then there's all the copyright tomfoolery! Jesus! Or maybe not? I dunno, seems like it would be.

So, in hindsight, this is well worth your time if you're a horror fan or movie fan basically. It may take you a few sittings to get through it though, but well worth it. Oh and all footage used is uncut, all the blood and gore is right there so all the real fanboy freaks will definitely get their rocks off I'm sure.

9.5/10

Coming 2 America (2021)

 

It seems Hollywood just doesn't learn a thing as movies continue to devolve into a state of complete and utter irreversible decay. Don't get me started on the tiresome superhero genre we're having to put up with.

So, someone thought it would be a good idea to make a sequel to a comedy that came out back in 1988. Now don't get me wrong, 'Coming to America' is easily one of the best comedies of the 80's, a sheer classic with a stellar cast, but a sequel? Well actually the idea of a sequel here works, for once. Yes the obvious story arc for this comedy does mean a sequel could be made and made well if done correctly. In fact the plot and title are so obvious it beggars belief how anyone could possibly feck this up (they still managed to feck this up...sigh!).

Without beating around the bush here, they have simply made the same movie again with all the same beats, jokes, and lines. Seriously!! I mean sure the plot reversal was always gonna be obvious but they didn't have to copy the original line for line. Do any of these writers have any imagination? And they get paid tonnes of money for this highly privileged and easy gig, Jesus!

We find out that Akeem had an illegitimate son back in Queens in the original movie. Akeem (Eddie Murphy) is now the King and requires an heir so this bit of news turns out to be quite fortuitous for him. So it's off to America to find and bring back his long-lost son in order to prepare him for his place on the throne.

The movie starts off in Zamunda pretty much the same way the original started. We meet King Akeem with his sweetheart Queen Lisa (Shari Headley) on the morning of their wedding anniversary (in exactly the same way we met Akeem at the start of the original). Akeem practicing his combat, another big dance number, this time for the funeral of Akeem's father King Jaffe Joffer etc...As the day progresses we meet many of the origjnal cast again along with a few new ones such as General Izzi (Wesley Snipes) who is the brother of Imani from the first movie (the bark like dog lady). And a witch doctor type character that genuinely looked like something out of a Sam Riami flick. General Izzi is the leader of a presumably corrupt militant nation next to Zamunda, hence the name 'Nexdoria' (ugh!). He wants Akeem's daughter to marry his son for obvious reasons that don't go anywhere.

There is also a small flashback sequence from the nightclub in the original with all the weird Queens women. Not only was this an obvious move to incorporate some of the old laughs of the original (seeing as this new one is devoid of much laughter), but it also allowed for a quite obvious CGI de-aging sequence of Murphy and Hall to showcase how Akeem ended up having a bastard son. Spoiler alert, it's because the quite awful Leslie Jones character drugged and fecked him (umm...controversial much?).

Back in America we eventually meet Akeem's long-lost son, and it's some random guy I've never heard of who looks exactly like Chris Tucker. Cue the inevitable old black barbers again (who are somehow still alive in this universe), and Akeem somehow dressing up in the exact same 'common American' outfit he wore in the first movie. You know the one, the NY Yankees jacket covered in badges with New York baseball hat? How and where in the hell, did he get that ensemble from?? It's at this point you know things are going downhill fast.

Back in Zamunda we now get the obvious reversal of the original movie which was to be expected and is fine. Akeem's son Lavelle (Jermaine Fowler) must acclimatise to the cultures and customs of an African country. This does lead to some of the more original aspects of this movie which work in comparison to the original, without feeling like the same shit all over again. Alas the writers still couldn't quite break away and ended up merely giving Lavelle the same moral/emotional quandary as Akeem had. He is supposed to have an arranged marriage but ends up falling in love with someone else, what to do?

Obviously you know what happens in the end because its bloody obvious. This movie is exactly the same as the first movie. I realise I have been comparing this movie to the original a lot but quite frankly what do you expect?  All they have done here is merely stuff in a load of famous cameos from various famous black singers and celebs which makes everything feel more fake. There are loads of (overly sexualised) dance numbers to presumably appeal to the younger hip generation (because overly sexualised content is for youngsters now?). There's a touch of ''white privilege'' throw in there at the start just to appease the woke crowd. And of course they had to brand the classic creepy Reverend Brown (Arsenio Hall) character as a sexist, because woke Twitterati.

All that aside, the real problem here is just how fake and small in scope the whole movie feels. It looks like everything was filmed on sets with CGI backgrounds. In the original we saw lots of New York, the movie gave you a real taste of the city/borough. I always loved how it was snowy when they filmed it, always gave the location some added realism. You tend to think of cold weather with New York. Just like John Landis did with 'Trading Places', also look out for another nod to that movie. But this new movie offers none of that, it's all enclosed on obvious sets, it looks like a TV movie. Even the sets were quite small!

This movie should have been called 'Coming to Zamunda' or 'Back to Zamunda'! Come on people!! It was bloody obvious! Or if you wanted to use the numeral then how about 'America 2 Zamunda'? Hire me Hollywood geez!

4/10