Upcoming Posts, Planet Terror and Death Proof Reviews

So, I haven't posted on the blog in what feels like a long time!
This is mainly because I have't seen many new films recently
And I've been busy with the return to school , and playing Grand Theft Auto 5 (Which I recommend!)
All I have been watching is a few things on Netflix, mostly Torchwood (Which I recommend!)
But what I did watch was the Double Feature: PLANET TERROR and DEATH PROOF
Now, for those who don't know, this was a little project done by Robert Rodriguez (Sin City, Spy Kids, Machete) and one of my favourite Directors; Quentin Tarantino. They decided to both make a film based on the old Grindhouse Horror films of the 70's. Rodriguez made a vintage style zombie movie, whereas Tarantino did a film about a killer stunt-man who uses his menacing car to murder his victims.
Now, both films aren't done in all seriousness, they're a bit of fun with some artistic directing thrown in. But I found both of them thoroughly enjoyable.
Tarantino has said that Death Proof is his worst film, and in all fairness it is, but it was never meant to be the best.
They are both gory, funny and enjoyable action-horror flicks that make you feel like your watching an old 70s horror flick. They both have some great cast members (Josh Brolin, Kurt Russel and Bruce Willis to name a few). Personally, I enjoyed Planet Terror the most out of the two, as some scenes drag on a bit too long in Death Proof. I don't need to tell you much of the story at all, just to tell you it's an enjoyable couple of movies.
Don't expect to see an amazing film, expect to see a fun experiment into making an old horror flick. And if that was its goal, it did it well.

Planet Terror; Robert Rodriguez, 2007

 

 

Death Proof, Quentin Tarantino, 2007

 

 

Now, back to business;
I will be doing some more film reviews when I next see something new, and also you may see some TV Reviews soon as well. Let's just say there's a few good programmes starting soon.
Also look out for upcoming news and stuff.
I've been the teenage film buff. Goodbye

Warm Bodies Review

Finally something new

It feels refreshing to watch something original

And that's what makes Warm Bodies so enjoyable. They took the genre of the zombie flick and turned it on its head. Yes, this isn't the first zombie romantic-comedy, but it is the first film in history to have a zombie as the main protagonist. Its got so many original ideas that it feels like something completely new.
The idea of making the zombie a sympathetic character, and that zombies can turn human again through friendship is original and ambitious.
The idea of having it set years into the zombie pandemic, with people who have grown up in it is pretty original too.
Nicholas Hoult had a hell of a job to pull off and it really shows how skilled of an actor he is. To communicate and show emotion while maintaining a zombie state is probably one of the most challenging acting roles I've seen pulled off in a long time and as an actor myself I feel Hoult deserves recognition for pulling it off.
Now with such an actor as Hoult, it would be easy for the female protagonist to be upstaged but Teresa Palmer holds her own, and manages to stay a strong screen presence.
Malkovich is always a pleasant actor to watch. Now the role of over-protective father has been done a lot, especially in romantic films, but Malkovich and his character make an original interpretation of this idea.
The visual style of Warm Bodies is great. It takes a quite abandoned location and makes it feel like home through the direction, camera angles and retro soundtrack.
The most original zombie film in years, it takes a risky twist, and pulls it off.
A lot of horror films nowadays feel the same, like we've seen it all before.
But what made Warm Bodies so refreshing and enjoyable is that it was original, engaging and really made you root for the characters.
If a film can make you root for zombies, who have been shown as carnivorous creatures for about 50 years on screen, then it has done its job right.
Warm Bodies earns the Buff's approval!

NEWS: Cumberbatch in Star Wars? And 50 Shades Casting announced,

Movie News

Cumberbatch in Star Wars?

Now, this is a rumor, and no matter how cool it is, it's probably just a rumor, but with an official announcement regarding Star Wars Episode 7 on its way, one site has posted that it will be the casting announcement of Benedict Cumberbatch. Everyone loves Cumberbatch, and he's worked with Star Wars 7 director JJ Abrams very recently on Star Trek Into Darkness. He's also just about finished Sherlock Season 3, Which means it is possible. But for now we'll just have to wait and see...

50 Shades Casting Announced

Within the last couple of hours, the news that a lot of women were waiting for was announced. The actress and actor who would be taking on the main roles in the upcoming 50 Shades of Grey movie. Sam Taylor Wood (Who is married to Kick Ass star Aaron Taylor Johnson) is directing the film adaptation of the best selling erotic novel. First, it was announced that Dakota Johnson (the Social Network, 21 Jump Street) will play the protagonist, innocent journalist Anastasia Steel. Then, very recently it was announced that Charlie Hunnam (Queer as Folk, Sons of Anarchy) will play heart-throb bachelor Chrisitan Grey.
This is not necessarily, news I care for but it's important to some, and worth sharing.
Love it or hate it, The Fifty Shades movie will definitely sell, due to its fan base. So it looks like a trilogy is brewing...

How do we know when to leave a Franchise alone?

How do we know when to leave a Franchise alone?

The big dilemma of cinema is that the studios always want to make sequels, prequels etc

But how do we know when enough is enough. It's always a bad idea to mess with a classic.
Some film franchises can last a long time. Some end in their prime.
The truth is that the more you milk a franchise, the worse it gets.
Take for instance, horror franchises such as the slasher films of the 70s and 80s.
Franchises like Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street. They were given so many sequels that eventually they just got ridiculous. Luckily there were some different things thrown in there as well such as New Nightmare and Freddy Vs Jason to keep the interest.
Now in some circumstances, a franchise can never die, and more is better. Although the only franchise this has ever been the case for is 007. Which gets stronger the longer it lives because it's updated and fit with the new times and technology. The Roger Moore Bond's were very new in the 70's yet now, we can't compare the visual wow of Daniel Craig's Bond to the older ones.
Nowadays, any more than a trilogy and you're bound to get sloppy. Sometimes, even after a crap sequel, you get a surprisingly good one.
But more than often you get well loved movie franchises that get a disappointing sequel (Such as Pirates of the Caribbean, Terminator etc)
What are your thoughts on this topic? What should be the cut off point for movie sequels? Comment below!

 

Reboots. Do we need them?

Reboots. Do we need them?

Since recent years, there has been a growing number of these "reboots" hitting our screens. But what are they and do we need them?

The term reboot in fiction (mostly film) means to restart a franchise from scratch by re-starting the story-line and changing it.
The first big reboot was Batman Begins in 2005. This is an example of a good reboot. 1997's Batman and Robin had completely destroyed the batman franchise and left it a film pariah. No-one wanted to clear up the mess cause by Schumacher's camp turd-fest. But then Christopher Nolan came along with the complete opposite. Batman Begins took Batman back to his roots, re-told his origin and re-started the franchise with a dark and gritty realism.
But then there came the horror reboot. Where a classic horror film would be pointlessly re-booted to appeal to the new generation. This began with Texas Chainsaw Massacre, which was rebooted unsuccessfully in 2003. Then again in 2013. It still hasn't worked.
Halloween was rebooted in 2007 but made a huge mistake in that it gave Michael Myers a backstory. But the reason Halloween was so successful was because Myers was a mysterious character. He had no apparent reason to be doing these horrific things. That's what made a lot of 70s and 80s slashers the works of art they are regarded as today. Halloween wasn't alone. Friday the 13th, Nightmare on Elm Street, all failed to live up to their predecessors. Because they tried to improved on something that was already great.
There are more and more reboots hitting our cinema screens every-year. We find ourselves constantly watching films we've pretty much already seen.
There is a Robocop reboot, a Godzilla reboot and a Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles reboot all coming in the next year or so. But the truth is they will never beat our much loved originals. Don't fix it if it ain't broken.
That's the moral of today.
What do you think of Hollywood reboots? What are the best and what are the worst? Comment below!

Dissappointing Sequels

Now there have been a lot of these

In this article, I'll be selecting 5 big disappointing sequels of the recent cinema. Yes RECENT . So nothing more than a few years old, like Terminator 3.

1. The Mummy- Tomb of the Dragon Emperor (2008)-Now, this one really got to me. The Mummy was one of my favourite films as a kid. Now, looking back at it, it's not a work of art. But I still have a nostalgic connection to it. The Mummy Returns was not as good as the original but it still held its own. When I heard there was going to be a third I was very excited. But this was not a mummy film. It featured Brendan Fraser character but that was where it's similarities ended. There were no mummies. There was a resurrected Chinese emperor and a terracotta army that came to life. PROS- Brendan Fraser was there, and it had the same humour as the originals. CONS- No Mummy, No Egypt, Un-enjoyable, Evie's actress changed, No Arnold Vosloo
2. Spiderman 3 (2007) - Okay this is six years old but it's still in recent memory. After the brilliant Spiderman 2, it really went downhill. It's like there were numerous ideas for sequels that were all packed into one. The Harry Osborn revenge story could have easily been one film, The Sandman story could have easily been one film and the Venom story really should have been one film. Top that off with the ridiculous sequence of Peter going emo and you have a bad sequel that managed to result in a reboot. PROS- Continuity, J Jonah Jameson is awesome as always. CONS- Numerous rushed storylines, Bad narrative, Emo Peter, Murder of Venom
3. Quantum of Solace (2008)- Yes this counts. Considering it continued on from Casino Royale which was a brilliant modern Bond reboot. We get a boring plot about oil prices. A boring new bond girl, an undeveloped villain and a terrible underuse of Judi Dench. PROS- Daniel Craig carries his own as Bond again. Gema Arterton's small appearance is great. Some good sequences. CONS- Boring plot, Un-interesting villain and Bond girl, Not enough M
4. The Bourne Legacy (2012)- Here's something recent. I don't even know if this counts as a sequel. They show Jason Bourne's picture and mention his name a couple times but that's about it. Considering it was action packed, I found myself falling asleep it was so bland. PROS- Jeremy Renner is a good actor but fails to save this film, It was nice to Rachel Weisz after a few years of absence, Jason Bourne's picture did some good acting. CONS- Boring, bland and no Bourne. Nearly fell asleep.
5. Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (2011)- The three previous Pirates films were very enjoyable. But this wasn't. They got rid of all the characters we loved and replaced them with Penelope Cruz, and a sailor who falls in love with a "Nice Mermaid". It's offensive to even write down. Geoffrey Rush's return was pleasant. PROS- Johnny Depp is the same Jack Sparrow we know and love. Geoffrey Rush was great. The late Richard Griffiths made a pleasant appearance, as did Judi Dench. CONS- a "Meh" plot, Boring new characters and the absence of some fan favourites

Well, there are definitely more, but these are my picks. Comment below with some of your worst sequels

Ben Affleck Batman, James Spader as Ultron and Kick Ass 2 reviews

So, three big things to tackle. Let's get on with it.

Ben Affleck as Batman

So as literally everyone knows by now, Ben Affleck has been cast to play the Dark Knight in Man of Steel 2. Now he has signed on to do the role in multiple films. There has been a lot of outrage but now it's my turn. I think it can work. He can look like Batman, he can brood like batman. And he certainly has the acting ability. Now I get the comments that Affleck can't pull off the duality of Bruce Wayne and Batman as well as Bale did but I'm sure he can. Besides, the film-makers must have seen some potential in him to actually cast him.

James Spader cast as Avengers Villain Ultron

Who is James Spader you may ask? Who is Ultron you may ask?
Now I'm going to be honest, I don't really know James Spader very well. All I know is that he does a lot of TV work and was in Lincoln..
Ultron on the other hand, I know more about. Ultron was a robot AI built by Ant-Man as his personal assistant. However Ultron turned out to have a mind of his own, and turned on the Avengers, becoming one of their biggest adversaries. At Comic-Con it was announced that the Avengers 2 would be sub-titled; Age of Ultron. Now, early this week there were rumors that rather than going with the comic book storyline, the film would have JARVIS, Iron Man's AI assistant, turn into Ultron. But now it appears this won't happen. Which means will Ant-Man make an appearance in Avengers 2? It's possible.

Kick Ass 2 Review

On Monday, I took the girlfriend to see Kick Ass 2, having re-watched the first one in preparation the night before. So I was ready to see the sequel.
Now first off, I am probably going to get slack for this reviews but why not. I'll now paste my Rotten Tomatoes review of Kick Ass 2:

The bad reviews are puzzling. Kick Ass 2 is easily one of the most enjoyable films of the year. There have been a couple big disappointments but this sure isn't one of them. Kick Ass 2 has the same brilliant ultra-violence of the first. It's also incredibly funny.
Aaron Johnson still has the same likability that he did in the first kick ass and gets to deal with some character dilemmas this time round.
Chloe Grace Moretz really shines in the second. They've given her more this time and it's worked. She steals many a scene.
Christopher Mintz-Plasse really steals the show. Every scene he is in is lit up by his hilarious performance as the Mother-F**ker .
Jim Carrey may only appear in the film for about 8 minutes but it's a great 8 minutes.
Kick Ass 2 was brilliant, and I was surprised at just how awesome of a film it was.
Other shiners of the film include the monstrous Mother Russia and John Leguizamo.
Kick Ass 2 was brill!
And with that, I conclude my first proper post.
This is Elliott Griffiths , Teenage Film Buff, signing off