Cloverfield.

Review #1038: Cloverfield.

Cast: 
Michael Stahl-David (Robert "Rob" Hawkins), T.J. Miller (Hudson "Hud" Platt), Jessica Lucas (Lily Ford), Odette Yustman (Elizabeth "Beth" McIntyre), Lizzy Caplan (Marlena Diamond), Mike Vogel (Jason Hawkins), Ben Feldman (Travis), Billy Brown (Staff Sergeant Pryce), and Chris Mulkey (Lieutenant General Graff) Directed by Matt Reeves.

Review: 
I suppose it makes sense to review this film today on January 18, since it is the 10th anniversary of the film's release in theaters, so it is a perfect time to get to it along with giving you fellow readers a new review after a week since the last one. 

When asked about the film prior to its release, J. J. Abrams (who served as producer for the film) stated that he was inspired to make an American monster after seeing Godzilla toys in stores in Japan with his son, one that would be "insane and intense", which is certainly interesting. I was eleven years old when the film came out, but I don't particularly remember the marketing for the film, although I imagine that it must've been interesting for people on the Internet to focus a bit of time on (take that statement as you may). In any case, how is the movie itself? I find the movie to be fairly decent, although I can't say I really thought it was that scary or all too special. It is an interesting idea to make a monster movie that doesn't intend to go for only big entertainment spectacle destruction and instead goes for something that plays on fears and anxiety that people would have if a situation like this actually did arise; one scene in particular stands out, involving people taking out their phones after seeing the head of the Statue of Liberty fall right near them. I wish I could say the plot or the characters are as intriguing as the concept for the film, but that it is not the case here. The performances aren't terrible, but they aren't too particularly interesting. I will state that Miller does a pretty decent job, however. I found him to be more interesting to follow than the plot around the other characters, even if most of the time he is just the guy filming the things happening. Caplan also comes off a bit interesting when she is on screen.

The film has a look intended to resemble hand-held camera filming, including jump cuts that make it feel a bit like a home movie, although I will admit that the effect can feel a bit disorientating at times. Apparently, some viewers of the film during its release experienced motion sickness due to the film's cinematography, to the point that some theaters posted warnings about the film that stated it may "experience side effects associated with motion sickness similar to riding a rollercoaster". Sometimes the shots (and the shakes) worked in my view, but other times it felt a bit tedious. I imagine seeing this in a theater would be a significantly different experience than seeing it on a normal TV set. The visual effects were incorporated after filming, so the cast had to react to an unseen creature during their scenes, which I suppose is an achievement on their part in imagination. The monster (of what we see, anyway) is not too terrible, and it generally is one that feels pretty creepy and menacing. It doesn't have much of an origin, but that doesn't really feel too surprising. The film runs at 84 minutes, which feels alright considering the plot matter and the shaky-cam stuff. Ultimately, Cloverfield has an interesting premise that it plays around with a bit to fine effect, but on the whole it is a fairly decent monster/horror flick that stands alone as a curiosity if one has the patience for it.

Oh yeah, I probably should refer 10 Cloverfield Lane (#784), released eight years after this film. That film, while not a direct sequel, was a fairly interesting thriller that certainly played itself as a thriller neatly enough. Cloverfield doesn't exactly pale too badly in comparison with 10 Cloverfield Lane, but I felt that this needed to be mentioned in any case.

Overall, I give it 7 out of 10 stars.

Kong: Skull Island.

Review #919: Kong: Skull Island.

Cast:
Tom Hiddleston (James Conrad), Samuel L. Jackson (Preston Packard), John Goodman (Bill Randa), Brie Larson (Mason Weaver), John C. Reilly (Hank Marlow), Corey Hawkins (Houston Brooks), John Ortiz (Victor Nieves), Tian Jing (San Lin), Toby Kebbell (Jack Chapman), John Ortiz (Victor Nieves), Corey Hawkins (Houston Brooks), Jason Mitchell (Glenn Mills), Shea Whigham (Earl Cole), Thomas Mann (Reg Slivko), and Terry Notary (King Kong, motion capture performance) Directed by Jordan Vogt-Roberts.

Review:
It's easy to admit that the idea of doing a Kong reboot could be regarded as unneeded, if put in the wrong hands. Having the film be set in 1973 (one could almost nickname the movie "VietKong", actually) is certainly an interesting choice. For me, I thoroughly enjoyed this film and everything that it wanted to be: a fun good time. It's easy to admit that this is a popcorn movie, with a great amount of entertainment and characters that would be right at home in a explorer movie. For me, this might've been just a bit better than the 2014 Godzilla film (#582), as this film definitely lets one see more of Kong - right from the beginning, in fact. Obviously there is more to the movie than just Kong (with some fine CGI and some fine motion capture from Notary), there's also the fine effects of the Skullcrawlers and enough eye-candy (with regards to how the movie is shot) and cinematography that I appreciated. There isn't any kind of cop-outs nor teasing, it flat out goes for the thrill and chills - and it succeeds. Hiddleston is a fair enough lead, but obviously the big standout is Jackson, who just hams it up in such an adversarial manner that just clicks. Larson is also a fair lead as well, with Goodman being as gruff and relatable as ever. Reilly is also pretty fun, having an eccentric but likable presence. The rest of the cast does a fine job, being useful enough. Honestly the best kind of lead are leads who act and move convincingly without just being screamers/stilted glory hogs. They aren't too developed, but they also aren't too one dimensional either. There is a good mode of pace and design, with monster fights that manage to be riveting. Obviously this is a movie that works as fun entertainment (and something to try and get one ready for a Godzilla/Kong matchup a few years down the line), and there's nothing wrong with that. It achieves what it wants to accomplish without derailing itself at any point, while letting Kong be Kong.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

House of Frankenstein.

Review #847: House of Frankenstein.

Cast
Boris Karloff (Dr. Gustav Niemann), Lon Chaney Jr. (Lawrence "Larry" Talbot/The Wolf Man), John Carradine (Count Dracula), J. Carrol Naish (Daniel), Elena Verdugo (Ilonka), Anne Gwynne (Rita Hussman), Peter Coe (Karl Hussman), Lionel Atwill (Inspector Arnz), George Zucco (Bruno Lampini), Sig Ruman (Bürgermeister Hussman), William Edmunds (Fejos), Charles F. Miller (Tobermann), Philip Van Zandt (Müller), Julius Tannen (Hertz), Hans Herbert (Meier), and Glenn Strange (The Monster) Directed by Erle C. Kenton (#845 - The Ghost of Frankenstein)

Review
Released one year after Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man, House of Frankenstein not only brings in Dracula and a hunchback to the monster mix, but it also has Boris Karloff, now starring in a main role who gets more time on screen than the monster he had originally played less than a decade before. This time around, Glenn Strange (the fourth actor to play him) plays the Monster for a very brief amount of time, which I guess makes sense considering how much we've seen of the character in the past few films, only being in the climax. Karloff and Naish do go well together, having some fine banter along with seeming right for the roles. Chaney is good as ever, just like the effects. If you're looking for a Dracula meet up with Frankenstein's monster, you will be sorely dissappointed, as Dracula is killed off less than an hour into the film. It is funny that he was brought back to life only because Karloff's character removed the stake from his heart. Carradine is fairly decent, but he doesn't really seem to evoke any creepy charisma that Lugosi had in the role. Verdugo is not as interesting to watch, although her calling Naish's character "mean and ugly" (the whole exchange is pretty strange itself) is somewhat enjoyable cheesy. The characters aren't really anything too special, but it is fun at least to see the ways that everything tries to be set in place, even if it comes off as cheesy, though that can work for most. At least it isn't the Wolf Man fighting Frankenstein's monster again, though there really isn't a full on monster mash. At 71 minutes, it works okay enough to pass for at least somebody. I find it to not be as good as the previous film, but it is marginally entertaining.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Eegah.

Review #751: Eegah.

Cast
Arch Hall Jr. (Tom Nelson), Marilyn Manning (Roxy Miller), Richard Kiel (Eegah), Arch Hall Sr. (Robert Miller), Clay Stearns (Band Member), Bob Davis (George), Deke Richards (Band Member), and Ron Shane (Detective) Directed by Arch Hall Sr.

Review
Woefully generic. Hopelessly stupid. Prehistoric drudgery. We could all come up with two (or one) word descriptions for this movie, but it's best said that this movie is what it is: Bad. The movie was intended as a starring vehicle for Arch Hall Jr, while also featuring some songs written by his father, who wrote, directed, produced, and even starred in this film. The movie evidently did make money (a million dollars, according to Hall Sr), so at least it wasn't a miserable result. As for the movie itself, that is a different story. Hall seems to have a very...peculiar face build, almost like a Halloween mask, though his persona seems to imitate Elvis...if Elvis was ditzy. The songs are at least legible, though not certainly noteworthy. Kiel is our caveman slash monster for the hour and a half, and while he doesn't say much, we at least get to see him...lick shaving cream. Whether you see this scene on MST3K or by yourself, you will pretty much have the same level of disgust, though (once again) I'd recommend the former. I watched simultaneously, to make sure I didn't miss any scenes I didn't see in the MST version...you aren't missing much. Actually, the segments by Joel and the bots are better than the movie, but let's not try to get too off topic here.

Hall Sr once said that "It was always sort of a subject of laughter that the darned thing did so well.", and that statement pretty much epitomes the movie very well, along with the dubbing that is apparent throughout the movie. The movie seems to just flow at a very subdued pace, without much regard for excitement or reality. The acting is about what you'd expect, in which there is no acting, casualness for a b-movie. It's strange to have Hall's dad play the father of his love interest...considering Hall Sr and Manning don't really have much chemistry for a father-daughter duo. If you like Bronson Canyon, you'll see it in the movie midway through, so that's a positive...I guess. The reason I don't give it a 0 is because at least the movie has some polish, as opposed to The Beast of Yucca Flats, but Eegah is right around the same level of bizarre film making of Manos: The Hands of Fate. If you want to see enthusiasm for their son that was channeled into a movie, I'd see it...preferably with the MST3K crew.

Lastly...watch out for snakes! (Actual line from the movie)

Overall, I give it 1 out of 10 stars.

Mothra.

Review #711: Mothra.

Cast
Frankie Sakai (Zen-Chan Fukuda), Kyoko Kagawa (Michi Hanamura), Hiroshi Koizumi (Dr. Shin'ichi Chujo), Ken Uehara (Dr. Harada), Jerry Ito (Clark Nelson), Yumi Ito & Emi Ito (The Shoubijin), Takashi Shimura (Sadakatsu Amano), Masamitsu Tayama (Shinji Tyuujou), and Tetsu Nakamura (Nelson's Henchman) Directed by Ishirō Honda (#167 - Godzilla)

Review
It has been way too long since I've reviewed a world cinema film, and what better one to do than Mothra, a Japanese film involving a monster (also known as kaiju), in this case a caterpillar/moth. Unlike Godzilla, the movie is less grim with regards to the monster and more light on the tone, with vocal group The Peanuts starring as twin fairies. Strangely enough, it all works well. It's a fun flick mainly because it manages to just be itself without going overboard in silliness. The color of the movie looks good, especially with the sets, looking so crisp. I like the effects on Mothra, especially after she transforms. Is it dated? Sure, but sometimes dated can be a good thing, and with this movie, it's a plus mainly because it's too much joy to dislike. The characters seem to be having a good time, and I like the main three actors (Sakai, Kagawa, Koizumi), who seem to click well. The villain (Itou) is hammy, but perfect for something like this. It may not be as thrilling as Godzilla or have the same impact, but Mothra makes up for it by just being a movie filled with bridled joy.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: It Conquered the World.

Review #684: It Conquered the World.

Cast
Peter Graves (Dr. Paul Nelson), Lee Van Cleef (Dr. Tom Anderson), Beverly Garland (Claire Anderson), Sally Fraser (Joan Nelson), Russ Bender (General James Pattick), and Taggart Casey (Sheriff N.J. Shallert) Directed by Roger Corman (#368 - The Little Shop of Horrors)

Review
With less than three days left in the year, why not review a monster mash flick from the 1950s? And from Roger Corman, no less. Only this time the monster draws laughs not because it's meant to, but because it looks like an ice cream cone with dopey looking eyes for good measure. At least the cast tries to seem less than ready to laugh at the monster (Garland notably laughed at the monster when she first saw it on the set, kicking it over, which led to it being made 3 feet taller...which only made it about 5 feet). I like Peter Graves in this film, though no one could make the last line "man is a feeling creature, and because of it, the greatest in the universe" sound anything but overblown, though the lines that precede and follow it aren't as silly. The movie is quick (save your complaints about me saying that all the time), which makes for an easy film to breeze through. It's tough to determine if this is a good movie, but if you're looking for a 50s monster mash movie to gawk (or laugh) at, I'd recommend it. Or the MST3K version.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Godzilla (2014).

Review #582: Godzilla.

Cast
Aaron Taylor-Johnson (Lieutenant Ford Brody), Ken Watanabe (Dr. Ishiro Serizawa), Elizabeth Olsen (Elle Brody), Juliette Binoche (Sandra Brody), Sally Hawkins (Dr. Vivienne Graham), David Strathairn (Rear Admiral William Stenz), and Bryan Cranston (Joe Brody) Directed by Gareth Edwards.

Review
It may have taken a while to get to another Godzilla film (#167 - Gojira), but I finally got around to it. And what better way to review a Godzilla movie then the latest one? Imagine being in the theater, a packed house after waiting an hour (or so) in line and then a while longer with trailers and such (The Giver film sounds like it'll be awful, Edge of Tomorrow reminds me of Groundhog Day for some reason, etc, but you get my point), the movie premieres. And the biggest cheer of the audience in the whole movie? When Godzilla uses his atomic fire breath. Heck, even I cheered for that because some things are just too awesome to say in words, so we say them in claps. The movie itself is good and certainly deserves a sequel. The cast isn't bad (though I wish there was more Bryan Cranston in it), our main character is okay even though it seems the cast gets more screen time then the monster himself, Godzilla. The movie seems to want to build tension and wait, so it cuts the first two monster fights (along with waiting an hour to show Godzilla) so we don't see much and then relents and shows the final fight, which is fantastic. Godzilla looks fantastic, looking incredibly imposing, and the roar is just great to listen to. Gareth Edwards does a great job directing as well, making me hope he returns for a sequel. The movie may take a while to getting what makes Godzilla awesome, but the payoff is excellent enough to leave you wanting more.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Pacific Rim.

Review #425: Pacific Rim.

Cast
Charlie Hunnam (Raleigh Becket), Idris Elba (Stacker Pentecost), Rinko Kikuchi (Mako Mori), Charlie Day (Dr. Newton Geizler), Burn Gorman (Dr. Hermann Gottlieb), Ron Perlman (Hannibal Chau), Heather Doerksen (Sasha Kaidanovsky), Ellen McLain (Jaeger AI), Robert Kazinsky (Chuck Hansen), Robert Maillet (Aleksis Kaidanovsky), Max Martini (Herc Hansen), and Diego Klattenhoff (Yancy Becket) Directed by Guillermo del Toro.

Review
Pacific Rim is the third in my walks to my movie theater, and when the film started, the audience had grown from a handful to a near room full. After I left, I kept that in mind while trying to form my opinions into one singular review that didn't say the same thing over and over again. And what did I think of this film? It was pretty awesome. Was it a great film? No, but for 2 hours, it was entertaining, and yet it didn't feel like it had been too sacrificing in the characterization, in fact I liked the characters, they were written alright, and the actors were good, such as Hunnam, Elba, Kikuchi, and even the supporting cast. They were likable, they were useful and they all had a purpose in this film. But of course, the main thing about this film is the Jaegers and Kaiju, who are grand in scale, but grander when battling each other. The battle scenes look beautiful, and they bring an epic scale, truly grand in scale. This film is about 80% battling, 15% on characters and about 5% manic energy. It even manages to bring a chuckle or two out of me, and this did a far better job of spectacle than the Transformers films ever did. But nevertheless, this is a pretty good film. It may take spectacle over characterization, but really did anyone not expect that? My main reason for watching this was because of the fact I could see giant robots fighting monsters and not have it all be a great dream. Instead, it is brought to life by Guillermo del Toro, who does a wonderful job. Truly, this one deserves the hype, and it deserves a watch, for the grand spectacle and the fun that it delivers. Truly, I did not waste my money watching this.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.