MikeHunt1075 Reviews

IF (I) (2024)

Tries too hard to force emotions out of you.

[3/10 · 20 May 2024]

IF

This film about assigning imaginary friends like it's a match making service could've been something decent, but its execution falls flat of being anything but a soon forgotten film that Ryan Reynolds made while waiting for his next Deadpool film to go into production.

This film has an idea of what it wants to portray but fails to build up any connection with any of the characters for the viewers to care any less about.

Everything seems to try to set up some emotionally uplifting pay-off in the end, but the build up is so quick that it is eye-rolling that the film is "This person. Who? Jump over any character development to care about. Something. All smiles and uplifting music" pay-off = Huh?

Whoever this films leading little lady is has a dad about to go under some sort of risky operation and stays with her grandmother. She doesn't have the expected sad, loner, left out, unhappy vibe. She stumbles upon Ryan Reynolds who is some sort of rjngleader of Imaginary Friends. She pushes her way into his life, and then is shown the place these IF things live.

There's no reason to care about how Ryan Reynolds character is supposed to be grumpy now compared to how he once was, and that small plot becomes extremely predictable what the outcome will be, leaving no surprise when it does to anyone over 7 years old.

This girl then just gets told to use her imagination and suddenly becomes God of the IFs world instantaneously, in a very unimpressive sequence of CGI cluster and a pointless musical number. Then back to the real world for some more snorefest interactions of almost seemingless pointless dialogue and it just leads up to a Labrynth knock-off ending.

The film tries to ram feeling good and smiling during uplifting happy music, with no set up as to why you're supposed to feel anything at all? It's like some stupid TikTok brain saw a film that did it, and said "who cares why? Just have the music kick in and make hearts glow and rainbows shine while everyone smiles and make everyone tear jerk at the happiness of it" but, without any setup as to why we're supposed to care as an audience, it's just lazy writing, or some sort of social expirement to see if people are going to feel emotional and tear up just because of the soundtrack and a bunch of characters in slow motion looking up and flashing their pearly whites.

The only thing this film made me feel was rolling my eyes at just how pathetic the build ups are to scenes where you're being forced to think everything's all magic and unicorn poop to fool the adolescent or people with IQs well below average.

Seriously, I'm expecting Dead Pool 3 to have some line about how IF was a late April Fools joke or made just to see if audiences even pay attention to what they're watching anymore and if competent writings even required anymore?

If you like CGI overkill characters, predictable outcomes, sloppy writing, forced emotional scenes only a child or moron would tear up for, and characters you won't invest a cent in, then this is the perfect movie for you. Otherwise, don't bother.

Comedy Legends (2018–2021)

Could have been so much better with a premeditated structural format.

[5/10 · 8 April 2024]

This does have great comedians to talk about, and give their highlights of their careers, but what's really annoying is most of them don't even mention some of the greatest TV or Movies they where in, or tell about how the actor/actress passed away.

It also repeats too much, like someone explaining a sketch word for word, then showing the clip of it, and then someone else repeats it again.

I don't know if certain copyrights prevented certain films and TV couldn't be used, but there was no need to constantly repeat the same thing 2 times whilst also showing the clip, or not giving the full stories from start to finish.

Its presentation structure is also very sloppy. Sometimes, you get a history of the episodes' main focus life story from when they were born to when they passed away, but others just start with their first TV/movie appearances and so on in order, where as others bounce from middle, end, start, somewhere else inbetween and then some random place.

I dunno if it's down to lousey editing, time consumption, or things got cut for time, but it doesn't really show the true respect these great comedians really deserved in telling their history.

If it was meant to just be a "Remember this" series, then it's what it's succeeded in doing, but it could have been so much better than it has been released as.

Wishmaster 3: Beyond the Gates of Hell (2001 Video)

Meh. Just a low budget made for TV film filler that didn't need to be made.

[3/10 · 12 March 2024]

If only the original script ript was used and the original Djinn actor reprised his role, this mightve been something decent. Instead they went with the cheaper to make script and it clearly shows. Who thought this would be a success?

You can accept the fact that this is now a completely separate Djinn to the one jn the first 2 films. OK, so you haven't got the original actor, so make the new guy a different Djjnn, fine, that's OK, makes sense... but you have to wonder if the writer of this 3rd instalment even watched the original movies, or cared?

The laws the first two films set up just get ignored here. I guess cheap writers only caring for a pay check are all alike, because in this script, the fire opal that inprisons the Djinn is just released from a box, but not the opal itself. The first two movies clearly show the stone must be broken to free the Djinn, but this one, it's just finding the stone in a lock box? Then the Djinn appears five minutes later after being freed?

Then when the Djinn is revealed, no one decided to light the set right to make the lower budget costume look a little better? Nope, fully lit and you can see all the plastic and foam bits clear as day.

From then on its just a typical poorly written repeat of the same plots. But on really low budgets.

The actors seem to not care they're in this film. Looks like they just did it for the money knowing this movie was going to be a waste of time making.

It's far from the worst film ever made, but it's even further from being a film you check out once. It's just a pointless film all around.

Warlock III: The End of Innocence (1999 Video)

Not too bad.

[5/10 · 11 March 2024]

I can see other reviewers here have given this a low score because apparently it's nothing like the previous 2 films. Well, I haven't seen the previous 2 yet. This just started playing after another film I had on, and I don't think it was all that bad.

It had a much better first half, where a college student finds out she's been left a house in her family and if she wants anything in it, go get it before the place is demolished.

She ventures to and into the house where strange things begin to happen. Then her friends show up and the Warlock, posing as a architect, and it evolves into are her friends truly her friends, or would they allow her to be sacrificed for the Warlocks plans?

Overall, the filming, lighting, audio etc is all good. The acting if fine. The sounds fine. The only thing that bothered me was a few glitch like moments, but I think that might have been Tubi, not the film itself.

I was entertained from start to finish, no moments of boredom and no previous films knowledge to be distracted by. So overall, this films ok for one viewing. Seems a bit harsh to rate it lower from others. Perhaps this a Halloween Season of the Witch moment? It just needs to be watched for what it is, and not what it's supposed to be following?

Decent for one viewing, I don't think it has any replay value tho.

The Story of Playstation (2023)

Nothing to gain from watching this.

[4/10 · 10 March 2024]

This documentary offers nothing you most likely already didn't know about the history of the Playstation.

It's presented through a couple of no-bodies being interviewed and sharing their useless nostalgia stories and uncaptivating personal histories that come off more vein than anything else.

They just talk about each launch of the new systems and mention a couple of leading games, while obviously not being allowed to talk about the games consumers where really obtaining the consoles to play.

It's also got quite some misleading parts to it, in particular one of them claiming the PS1 had better graphics than the Nintendo 64... yeah, nah a umm, 32 bit system vs a 64 bit is not going to have better graphics. What they're failing to admit is the PS1 was easily chipped to run bootleg games, where as the Nintendo 64 wasn't able to be modified like that, and that's how the PS1 outsold Nintendo's 64 console. It wasn't from it being a better console or had vcd.

Also, the sound editing during this entire thing is atrocious. At points you can't hear what someone's saying because music is drowning it out, and it's annoying as bleep that way the sound goes up and down and has no constant level. Very poor job on the audio all through out this pointless documentary from the pov of a couple of nobodies.

Would I Lie to You (II) (2022)

I'd be lying if I said it was good.

[4/10 · 11 February 2024]

This show is the US attempt at creating an already great UK show where two teams of celebrities play against each other in a series of rounds where the opposition has to guess if they are telling the truth or making it up?

The UK version is already a classic after about 15 years of being on the air, but this US version just doesn't have the same vibe.

The host and two team captains are not cast right. The host contributes nothing, and who the heck are the team captains anyway? One is plain annoying thinking she's a rapper or something, the other seems to have little to no charisma.

The selections for guest "celebrities" is a real head scratcher. I think a total of 3 people have been on this show I'd actually call a celebrity. The rest seem to be unheard of "comedians" and some sort of TikTok nobodies.

Its a show that could work for the USA, but it needs to scrap everything its doing right now, follow the UK formula and actually have guests on people know and wanna see on a weekly basis.

Give the show to someone like the Who's Line Is It Anyway crew, or bring back a team from the past like the MadTV cast perhaps? Anyone but these has-beens that never was who pretend the audience knows who they are and add in 2 or 3 actual celebrities during the coarse of the season.

By the way, I said follow the UK formula, which means, stop doing the typical US filler where when a known name is mentioned, it gets a round of applause, and the terrible obvious cuts in editing that ruin the feel that what you're watching isn't just slapped together because there's too much boring stuff being cut out. Get the vibe going and let the guests let loose, not an obvious take 2 moment.

Kliq This: The Kevin Nash Podcast (2022 Podcast Series)

Was good, but Sean Oliver has killed it.

[3/10 · 24 January 2024]

The podcast itself was interesting for a while, but has become way too try-hard with Sean Oliver's unessercery clips from the show being made into small, pointless/who cares, topics that flood your YouTube subscriptions with absolutely useless garbage, because Sean thinks that's how you promote a channel.

The premise is obvious. Sean Oliver hosts a podcast with former wrestling legend Kevin Nash and discuss whatever they want to talk about. Fine, it's their podcast, they can talk about what they want, but they have no understanding that their podcast is being watched globally, and they just discuss things that fit into their local areas. Not being American myself, I could not give a damn about politics. Not on a global scale, my own country, or Sean and Nash' local candidates. But like I said, they can discuss whatever. It's their show.

What sickens me tho is Sean Oliver will take useless snippets from the hour or so podcasts, and upload them to YouTube with stupid titles like "Who does Kevin Nash support in the election", "Kevin Nash on how he feels about toilet paper", "Kevin Nash reveals how his last fart smelled", "What Kevin Nash had for breakfast".... seriously, if anyone wants to know or care about such useless information, then I can't express enough how much you need to get a life, and stop supporting such trash, so Sean Oliver can be paid in ad revenue for spamming such pathetic snippets to the gullible who just click and watch anything and comment "first" or "love you,saw you once at black blah"... such insightful information no one could have gone on living without knowing.

The podcast occasionally has other guests, but it seems Sean uploads the full podcast at first, then takes it down to upload his useless snippets for more clicks. I had to unsubscribe because I'm just not putting up with that sort of thing from anyone, or the dribble he does make into snippets.

It was good in the beginning when Nash revealed some backstage information and shed light on things from his past wrestling days, but now it's like they've run out of wrestling stories, and just think talking politics, sports and promoting products they've probably never used is all that's needed to call what they're doing as entertainment.

Sorry, im not interested in anyone's completely useless opinions about anything. I don't care what they think of a TV show, movie, drink, betting pools, what they had for dinner, how they think everyone else should be entertained.

It's become a snorefest of egotism of not being able to take a look at themselves, and wonder why what most of what they say should be cared about by anyone else?

Still, I suppose you have your fans of things like Gogglebox, so there's obviously plenty of people to watch pointless and useless dribble and think it's entertainment, because they dont have the intelegence to realise they're being duped.

Nothing against Nash, tho. He's just answering the useless questions Sean Oliver is asking.

The final straw with this podcast was Oliver posting the snippets of how he doesn't care what the haters of the podcast think.... I wasn't a hater, I was suggesting how to improve the show for better viewing, but Oliver doesn't care about long-term viewers, just what money he can make off it right now. Sounds like he has a lot on common with Vince Russo, and his podcasts fate will match that of WCW in the end.

The 50 Best Horror Movies You've Never Seen (2014 TV Movie)

Pretty much a collection of pretend it's good promos

[4/10 · 18 January 2024]

Honestly this entire list is a bunch of annoying actors pretending the bad horror movies they appeared in once are actually worth watching. They're not.

Most of the people talking about these are annoying, hard to like, conceited, or eye rolling at how bad they're trying to pat themselves on the back for creating, seeing, or being in a bunch of B-grade shock.

This feels like Tubi put it together to aid trick watchers into checking out some of their God awful content... I don't know IF Tubi even make it, but it's currently on Tubi and so are most of these horrible horrors.

It's slightly better than the "50 Worst Movies" documentary, but not by much. It gives little to no insight about the films either, just some nobodies nostalgia memories that any sane person couldn't give a rats behind about.

The House on Sorority Row (1982)

Slashed ending.

[5/10 · 18 January 2024]

For a 1980s slasher film, this one stands up above the rest as far as acting goes. The cast is great and only a few eye rolling moments about acting badly, but for the most parts it's portrayed well and overall believable.

The plot evolves around a small group of college graduates, whom decide to stick around their sorority house a few more days to throw a graduation party. They also decide to play a prank on their den mother, whom none of them favour well. The prank turns deadly and the girls decide to hide the body and party on. However, during the party, a spree of murders begin leaving to question if the den mother is actually dead?

The film was acted well on most parts, it's shot nicely, the pace is not boring at all, and the score is all fine... the problem with the film is the ending. It just abruptly ends, and I cannot stand movies that suck you in from start to... terrible finish.

I don't care about anyone's nostalgia, find memories or love for such and such, if a film has a terrible ending like this, and no sequel to kick off wherever ended, then forget it, it gets no higher rating or a recommendation as a hidden gem.

It's a shame the director didn't listen to ideas of an alternate ending, as talked about in related interviews, because it could've actually made this film a classic slasher flick with a satisfying ending.

RoboCop: Rogue City (2023 Video Game)

Robo flop

[3/10 · 28 November 2023]

For a game released in 2023, the graphics look like they're from GTA3. Every horrid animation is a polygon staring upwards and rocking around with the mouth moving, but it's completely out of sync with the audio.

If 1 person made this game, I'd say it was impressive, but I'd expect this to be a free game on mobile devices, not a so called finished product that was ready for release.

The voice actors are terrible, aside from Peter Weller, not one returning character sounds, or acts, the way they did in the films, and they're not even close. Did the devs do the voices themselves and intend to get better voice actors, but couldn't afford it, or be bothered replacing them?

The new main villian looks like a direct rip-off of Hans Gruber, and the new jerk in charge of Robocop is like a very poor rendition of Jimmy Smits, but nothing in comparison to the terrible voice choices of the old man and the police chief.

Speaking of, can't they give these guys names? Calling him "the old man" has run its coarse, would it be so hard to refer to him by name? I guess the devs thought it'd be funny, which they don't know what funny is, because from start to finish, this games storyline and scenes don't nail a single joke it tells.

I really hate the ending too. They've completely ruined the character of the old man, and it felt so way out of line to have him the real villian in the end.

Perhaps on an anniversary of this game, they might update EVERYTHING and do it right, as I can't imagine any modders bothering to improve anything hardly of worth here.

Sure, other reviews are praising it, but the earliest reviews like that are always fake as.

Many are saying it's so much better than the last Robocop game, yeah, maybe? But it still suffers from the exact same thing of the previous game, and that's there is no replayability once it's completed.

I'm not going to pretend this is a great game just because it's the first Robocop game in years. It looks cheap, sounds absolutely horrible, and all the effort has clearly only been put into Robocop himself, and the rest looks like an after thought.

Tunnel Vision (1976)

On par with Loose Shoes.

[2/10 · 23 August 2023]

I love Kentucky Fried Movie, laughed little, but at parts of Amazon Women on the Moon, Loose Shoes, etc... but this one, this one's had probably the minimal laughs of all these types of movies.

I think I laughed once and smirked twice. Those were way beyond the halfway point of this mostly non-stop garbage.

The brief 10-second scenes featuring Chevy Chase and John Candy are nothing to go out of your way to check out. Not even a smirk to be had with their cameos.

Even trying to imagine I was back in the 70s watching this, I still can't imagine I'd be laughing much during this. Most of the skits don't even seem to be done in humour, but more as filler.

The racial and sexist skits of coarse wouldn't be accepted today, but even trying to think with a 70s mind, I still can't imagine being amused at the pathetic gags.... if you can even call it that.

When it comes to these types of movies, I always tend to wonder if there's any scene or skit that would fit perfectly edited into Kentucky Fried Movie or slap together a bunch of scenes to edit together a KFM II? This film is pretty much equal to Loose Shoes... there is 1.5 scenes I'd add. Which means overall, there's about 10 seconds of this film worth seeing. The rest is throw away garbage not worthy of anybodies time at all.

Weird: The Al Yankovic Story (2022)

Way too fictional

[1/10 · 14 August 2023]

The truth to the Weird Al success is that he had a decent hit in the 1980s parodying a Michael Jackson song, then just kept his face popping up now and then in Lesley Neilson films, up until the turn of the melenium where he struck it lucky by having the record company actually put some money into his video clips on his latest CD spoofing Star Wars.

It was at this time younger audiences saw his clips amongst actual music on MTV and with there being no contest in the parody market, the kids associated parody/spoof/funny songs with the name Weird Al, having known no other comedic writers.

It was at this time luck struck big time for Al, as Napster was born. Any, and pretty much anything comedy related, was being mislabled by the kids as being a song by Weird Al.

It should have been a time to rocket the original artists to the top, but instead the kids only knew of Weird Al as being the guy doing the silly stuff, so everything silly was just named Weird Al as the artist.

Years after the closure of Napster, the damage still remained. So many great artists work like Bob Rivers, Bob & Tom, Dr Dirty John Valby, Kevin B Wilson, Rodney Rude and so many more have had their songs heard by millions, laughed at by millions, and mislabelled as being written by the wrong person.

The question most of these supposed Weird Al fans seem to not realise, is if you ask them their favourite songs, they often mention songs with adult language. Aka the R-rated ones. To which they blink in blank stares when you inform them that whatever that song is, it's not Weird Al because Weird Al does not do anything R or x-rated. He barely registers a PG rating.

That's because Weird Al thinks everything he does should be family-friendly and commercial. Very straightforward PC humour.

This is why I can't give this film any higher a rating or say anything good about it. It's written by one of the Napster day fans who don't really know Al's actual work, just what they thought was his, up until they tried to get the rights to certain material, and I'll guarantee they mention nothing about the actual truth of his popularity boom in the early 2000s due to mislabelling other people's funny songs and being falsely recognised as the comedic talent of filth that he never actually was, and once that's realised, his PC G-rated songs he has written seem pretty bland, boring, easily forgetful and most of all, not funny.

This man has just been extremely lucky to have been in the right place at the right time. But, none the less, the true meaning of what highly overated is. The film tries to convince you otherwise. But no, that's not the true way his popularity came to this movie.

If You Don't Stop It... You'll Go Blind!!! (1975)

I didn't quite make me blind, but it was a decent attempt

[6/10 · 10 August 2023]

Thank you to Tubi for recommending this unexpected little tucked away gem. I love parody and slap stick goofball comedies, and sure, there are a LOT of stinkers out there. But this one has its moments of its share of laughs.

It's not quite up there with the likes of Kentucky Fried Movie, but it is about on par with Loose Shoes if you're familiar with those classics.

As I said, it's hit and miss with a few of the sketches and gags, but it still manages to hit enough targets to tilt the scales to a thumbs up by the end.

As long as you have a low brow sense of humour for dirty sex jokes and toilet humour, this one's worth checking out.

Gold Diggers (2023– )

6 'n a half for these lovely Sheila's!

[6/10 · 10 August 2023]

It's quite surprising to have read the negative reviews around here from the old fuddy duddies. I'm not even sure how that's spelled, but it's what they are. Perhaps they need to pull the stick out of where it doesn't shine, or insert another one next to it, because this show is an unexpected hit with me.

Which I can tell you, is suprising, as I'm not into gold rush era times, or much of Australian made shows at all any more, but finally one's come along that's actually just having some fun and not wreaking desperately of trying to do everything for a stinking Logi award.

Sure, it's not historical either, which I've seen too many complain about in reviews. To that I say "So what"? It's a comedy series, not a documentary. These people have no problems suspending belief for a house caught in a tornado and dropped in a non-existant place where murder is fine, or a Nanny who leaves the impression where kids try to jump off high places with an umbrella and find out the hard way that fairy tales are only magical on screen, but God forbid these ladies do a comedy set in the gold rush years with a more modern pop culture dialogue for fun rather than a done to death premise.

I haven't really caught the lead actresses names yet, so they nay not be household names yet, lol, but they're chemistry together as the Brewer sisters is great.

They've come to a small town secretly being on the run as wanted criminals in Sydney for a murder they may or may not have committed.

They settle down and turn the town upside down by being themselves that either offend the locals or they absolutly love them.

Each episode theh get into some sort of mischief or have some plan to find a lover, get someone back or achieve something or other. They are hilarious together and parody the time period as feminist women in their own DILLIGAF way.

Hopefully, the fuddy duddies don't ruin a second season happening, the shows great and that's coming from someone not really into these things at all.

Also, great to see Heather Mitchel (Ashka from Spellbinder) back on telly. Her brief appearances where great, hilarious, something I haven't seen her play before.

(Re)Solved (2023– )

What's "Solved"?

[4/10 · 20 July 2023]

This is kind of interesting to watch at first, but then you suddenly stop and wonder why these people are even making this show?

The shows title is not at all what this show is about. It's about a couple of nobodies, pretending to be somebodies, talking about the deaths of celebrities and what they personally think, suspect, theorise and speculate, but in the end, not a shred of evidence to prove anything. Nothing is actually solved.

The most annoying one is Deanna Thompson who can't open her mouth without telling you about what other investigations she's appeared in. She just has tickets all over herself. She comes off as someone who believes self promotion means more than the death of somebody and how their family and friends would react having to watch her love and admiration for herself everytjme she opens her gob.

Overall, this show is nothing more than a useless series devoted to useless opinions. It might clear up how an actor died IF you didn't know already, or you didn't hear the whole story. But that's it. The rest is whoevers speaking personal opinion they want you to believe because it's what they believe.

Everything else is pointless background filler. At least shows like Unsolved Mysteries had updates and resolves now and then, this show has cases that no one will ever know the truth to. This show is the equivalent of a passing YouTube comment saying "I THINK the butler did it"

The Delightfully Shit World of Hayden and Lachlan (2012– )

A rating this high? Lol, keep dreaming.

[2/10 · 12 July 2023]

Looks like the cast got all their mates to rate this up higher than it ever deserves.

I somehow caught the first episode of this on a public broadcasting station 31. I laughed my rear off and thought it was the most hilarious thing I'd seen in years. Afterwards, I felt like telling all my mates they need to check out this show, it's absolutly wee weez funny!

However, after viewing episode 2, the laughter stopped. Infact, it didn't even get started again. I managed to suffer through the whole season, but not a laugh to be found. Not even a small chuckle. The only time I ever laughed again at this show I think mightve been the second season at a song parodying "Splish Splash".

It's baffling how the debut episode I would give 7/10, maybe 8/10. Then every episode following it, a solid 1/10, apart from that other episode I mentioned that gets a 3/10 for having a funny song, but the rest of the episode was just as the shows title describes.

Where this went wrong was filming the same sketch 100 times with a different punchline for each take, then splitting it up into the same alternate sketches one after the other each weeks episode.

The biggest problem is they only had 1 funny take for most of it, and it was all put in episode 1, the rest of the season was unfunny out-takes presented as episodes instead of cutting room floor material where it belongs. Not even stuff worth adding as a bonus feature for its 20th anniversary release had it been successful.

I've never been so disappointed in a show after such a strong first episode that looked like this was the beginning of an Aussie sketch comedy classic.

It's such a shame it failed and they where just the 1 hit wonder with the 1 episode alone that was great.

Kangaroo Jack (2003)

Jack off

[3/10 · 5 July 2023]

What killed this movie before it was even released was the trailer. You see, the film is about chasing a real kangaroo around the outback, with a dream sequence where one of the characters dreams the kangaroo is animated and talking/rapping which gave the impression this was going to be some whacky cartoonish film about an animated talking kangaroo. But audiences would soon find that's not the case at all and find themselves watching something they weren't exactly expecting. I could imagine it caught the attention of a lot of young children who wanted to go see this, only to be disappointed it wasn't what the trailer made it out to be, and wanted to leave before the movie was over.

Whomever put the trailer together should be made to blame for the misleading premise. Most likely they put together a trailer without the animated part, and felt it wasn't going to attract anyone, so they included the animated bits, gave the wrong idea about the movie to drag in whoever they could, and hoped they made their money back they spent making this.

Shocker (1989)

The acting is pretty shocking.

[6/10 · 23 June 2023]

There's a real cool factor to this movie, the 80s metal soundtrack and the MTV pacing, but after not having seen this for awhile, and recently rewatching it again, it's certainly easy to see why Wes Craven never bothered to do a sequel and kickstart his franchise intention.

Now, I like the film, I do, but no one can deny the fact that real shocker in this film is the acting. Starting with our leading man, Peter Berg, he really puts on a horrible display of some pretty bad acting. It's hard to connect with a character who almost takes tragedy emotionally, and then when forcing the emotion out, doesn't make it convincing.

Some of the dialogue is pure garbage. It makes me wonder whose fault it was? Craven? The actors? The monkey that wrote it that's never heard two people interact before? Either way, it makes the leading man pretty cringe.

Then there's his girlfriend, Alison. Whom the only interesting thing about her almost non-existant acting career outside of this film is she's not related to Alice Cooper.

Speaking of, the film has a great 80s metal soundtrack, one being No More Mr Nice Guy covered by Megadeth, but the disappointing thing is Alice's song on the album doesn't stand out enough. I say Alice, but it wasn't actually his band, what happened was someone came up with the idea for a Super group of Rock n roll musicians. The group would be called The Dudes of Wrath. Alice was one vocalist, Paul Stanly of KISS was the other. Tommy Lee was on drums and Kip Winger on guitar, aswell as a few other names. They sadly only ever recorded two tracks. One called Shocker, the other, Shock Dance! Shocker is heard as the opening theme, but sadly Cooper singing on Shock Dance with a cameo by Mitch Pillati as Horace Pinker should've become a hit for the super group. Unfortunately the movie didn't become the box office smash they where hoping for, and the Super Group called it quits.

I just mentioned Mitch Pollaties plays the villian, Horace Pinker. How different this character is from The X-Files character Skinner! Mitch is having fun and playing it over the top, but it's easily tolerable as he's also the comedic element of the film.

Then there's a few other actors who play pretty bad roles. I think the father character is about the only decent actor to be found. Everyone else acted like they where actual football layers trying to act in their debut role.

When you hear dialogue where someone says the other person's name out loud sk the audience now knows their name, its no ex machina, it's pure cringe.

It's made me wonder if Wes Craven cared about the scripts dialogue, or if he was shown some of the latest technology in video editing, and decided this was his Matrix, meaning he just wrote ite whatever rubbish he did around seeing the special effects of putting actors inside pre-exisiting video. The films final act brings this in, where our main hero and villian channel surf into a bunch of different things on television, like Wes thought this was what the movie was going to be all about, and it would blow viewers minds!?

Unfortunately what it created was a rather slow and boring pace leading up to the arrest of Pinker with filler rubbish and premonitions nausea forced in to the bad acting and dialogue.

Then the movie picks up a bit.

Then the final act feels like Wes completly left it up to the SFX team and was so mezmarozied watching it he didn't make any inspirational film making, he just thought these now really cheap effects would let the movie carry itself to the final cheap scene that could've been so much better had Craven not been wanting to continue this as a franchise, and just kill off Pinker in a satisfying way.

This movie does however have so much potential. This is one exception I'd be all for having it re-made. Too bad Hollyweed don't care what should be remade, only what should've never been touched, just so they can sell toys to kids and cash in on the name.

Amy Schumer: Emergency Contact (2023)

Where's the jokes?

[1/10 · 20 June 2023]

This was just Amy Schumar coming out to have a chat to the audience. You can hear the audience laugh, but, at what? I didn't manage to laugh, or even chuckle once, at anything she said during this under an hour, or an over the time limit, 30 minute failure.

No, I'm not an Amy hater, but this stand-up is not worthy of being called one. The audience deserves their money back and the viewer can never get back that 50 mins of waiting to hear something funny, but instead, just Amy gloating about herself and shelling out filler after filler.

This is where this review should end, but I need 22 more characters and ... oh, done!

Paint (II) (2023)

Why??

[1/10 · 12 May 2023]

Why would anyone give the green light for Owen Wilson to defecate on the good name of Bob Ross?

Why would Owen Wilson think he's someone that should play a fictional version of a beloved artistic influence from modern history?

Who would even want to see anybody portray Bob Ross in this pathetic attempt at whatever stupid idea was thought up to concieve whatever this abomination of a movie has set out to be?

Hollywood haven't had a decent original thought in years, and now it's aiming to tarnish historic people's legacies with atrocious fictional storylines that nobody ever asked for.

Owen Wilson should hold his head down in shame for taking a pay check for making this film.

Wham Bam Thank You Ma'am (2016–2017)

God Awful

[1/10 · 24 April 2023]

A sketch show with un-funny women pretending to be men, yet showing they've clearly never actually had one.

I'm all for women taking the mickey out of guys, but these people think talking loudly is funny instead of actually being or saying anything even remotley funny at all.

Joking about feminine hygiene products has already been done a million times, and a billion times better. Just mentioning a tampon is supposed to be funny, according to the writers of this show.

It's no surprise this only got one season, yet it's also shocking it lasted that long. It never should have been aired to begin with. It's the type of show you'd show to aspiring sketch show creators as an example of how not to do sketch comedy. Without jokes, it's not funny in any way shape or form.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles III: Radical Rescue (1993 Video Game)

What is this sewerage?

[2/10 · 19 March 2023]

The first title for the turtles released on Gameboy, The Fall of the Foot Clan, was pretty basic. Then the sequel, Back from the Sewers, was pretty good, taking its inspiration from the arcade game, but now, this game, a game that should have been better than 2, failed to be so.

Right off the bat, I was wondering if I was playing the right game? All these trees around, and bats... yes, bats!? The lazy devs idea of an enemy in NES titles. Yet, this is Gameboy, and here we see, unrelated to the TMNT series, bats, attacking us in a Turtles game?

There's also stupid jump limitations to reach certain heights. Why do devs do these kinds of things? What's the point? To encourage Game Genie/Shark users?

The plot is pretty simple. Michealangelo was out for pizza when the rest of the guys got caught by Shredder. Now he has to go rescue them and then beat Shredder and Krang to save the day.

I don't know why when a game works, these devs decide to change everything up and go in solly directions like this game did. It's only cool addition is Mikey can use his nunchucks like a helicopter to slow his landings. Too bad we're not playing Mary Poppins here.

Overall, compared to the previous sequel, this game has really dropped the ball. I'd really only recommend the second game if you feel you must own a TMNT gameboy title.

This one really feels off. Bizarre additions, levels that are no fun, stupid bat enemies, and a soundtrack that's not pleasing to the ear at all.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles II: Back from the Sewers (1991 Video Game)

The better of the 3 TMNT games for the Gameboy.

[5/10 · 19 March 2023]

I was actually quite surprised right off the bat when I booted this up and heard the iconic turtle theme, and the intro of the Arcade game!

Even tho it's not the Arcade, it is a spin off of it. I'm not sure why the devs didn't just go for an Arcade port, maybe memory issues getting all the levels? But this versions not too bad.

A side scroll action beat em up, just like the Arcade, let you control the TMNTs to face off against many familuer foe. The mechanics are a jump button, and one to attack. Holding both performs a super kick. Oddly it's more of a baseball slide, and would have been much better if each turtles had a unique move, but instead the only difference is the weapons, yet they all hit pretty much the same way.

Although not the best game, its certainly the best of the 3 Ninja Turtle games that came out for the Gameboy. I'd much more recommend this title over the the first and 3rd turtles games. There's no lazy developers here just throwing in generic bat enemies this time!

Overall Graphics are fair.

Sound is pretty good.

Controls do what they should.

Replayability isn't much once completed.

5/10.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Fall of the Foot Clan (1990 Video Game)

Pretty Basic.

[4/10 · 19 March 2023]

Although this is completly different to the NES version, it does sport better graphics and looks, but that's about it. It plays as a pretty generic side scrolling beat em up, feels very repetitive and has pretty much no replay value, once completed.

It's a very, VERY poor man's version of the arcade. There's far better games simmilar to this, including its sequel, which is honestly the much preferred version of the TMNT titles available for the Gameboy.

All four turtles are selectable, April makes a brief appearance, and you fight mostly Foot-Soldiers, and Mousers, and of coarse, bats! What NES game wasn't complete without battling the generic bat? The lazy devs here have done it again now in a gameboy game. No surprises there. Instead of anh recognisable enemy known to the turtles, we get bats! Cowabungholio.

It's very short, not very difficult and as I said, contains no replay value. TMNT II - Back From The Sewers is the only version of the TMNT games for the Gameboy anyone needs for a TMNT GB game, parts 1 and 3 are throw away with too many bats in them.

Super Mario Land (1989 Video Game)

Nothing really "Super" about it.

[4/10 · 19 March 2023]

Had I owned this back in the day, it mightve seemed more fun, but playing it today out of curiosity, it's not really much of a great entry in the Mario series.

The problem probably lies within it being created by the guy who designed the gameboy and the Metroid series. It just doesn't play or really look the way a Mario game should be. It has worse sprites than the NES here and you can really see and feel the difference between this and its Nintendo made sequel.

I've already mentioned the sprites don't look right. Even in larger mushroom form, the Mario brothers just look weird. Like small bodies and large heads. It is interesting tho that it's added a plane and submarine in certain levels, giving a new type of experience in a Mario game, however there are far better versions of that type of game out there.

Something also interesting is it introduces Daisy to rescue, instead of Princess Peach. The character then went on to appear in the Movie flop of 1993, leaving the impression for many fans that Daisy is Luigis girlfriend, tho I don't think that's ever been officially confirmed in the games series.

I found too many things rather annoying about this game, not just the sprites, but the mechanics of the game. Quite often it's annoying to position Mario/Luigi right to enter pipes, but worse is when trying to land on a platform and either slipping through the edge and dying or sliding off completely. Really annoying that.

It's a pretty short game too, I think it was only 4 worlds? 4 stages each? I'm not sure, but very short for a Mario game, even a Gameboy one.

Being 2023, I played a coloured version of the game, which did improve it a bit from the original black and white/green. However it still has all the cons and in my opinion one of the least favourable Mario games of them all.

I'd recommend Mario Land 2, but not this one. Not to any casual gamers anyway, if you're a Mario buff or just curious to play it, yeah, go for it. But if you've never played it, you're not missing out on a must-try experience here. There are much better Mario games out there actually created by the original Mario makers.