davis2000 Reviews

The Breach (I) (2022)

9/10 for FX, 6/10 for storytelling

[7/10 · 2 April 2024]

I'm not sure I saw the same film as y'all. The premise and development of the plot was fairly understandable but you can't watch this movie while also playing on a phone or tablet as some of the cues are quick or subtle.

The FX are top-notch, especially the inverted humans. I can't see how that was done with CGI so maybe it was just painstaking physical effects.

**** SPOILER **** An experimental physicist is working on some sort of interdimensional portal. There is discussion of the work at CERN and how it was already opened a portal to somewhere else, a common internet conspiracy theory.

His work has succeeded tragically as in his attempt to bring back a lost daughter, he opens a portal that he cannot close. Not good news for anyone in the film and presumably a bad day for planet Earth.

Some of the acting was a bit wooden but it didn't ruin anything for me and there were undercurrents of tension and such that could explain a lack of rapport between some of the characters which could result in this behavior.

Again, an exciting premise, not executed terribly but also not A-grade. The FX were far better than I had expected and better than many A-list movies that Hollyweird has delivered in the past few years.

The Hard Way (2019)

Abysmal

[2/10 · 27 September 2020]

There's nothing to commend in this movie other than the main actor's performance. The story was labored and the twist was predicted from the first half hour. I can only assume that actual paramilitary types would avoid the many mistakes made by those in this dreck. Continuity errors and plotholes...I could go on but watching this was punishment enough.

Skybound (2017)

Horrible on all levels

[1/10 · 21 March 2018]

This is utter dreck. Sub-par acting and a script full of flaws are matched with poor effects and stupid characters.

First, the radiation from 16 nukes would be deadly in the immediate area of the blast but only a nearly direct hit would effect the park in Utah and who would want to set fire to Monument Valley? A few dozen miles away you'd have zero radiation until fallout and then it would be minimal. The scenario they describe would require several hundred modern hydrogen bombs.

Second, even horror movie characters aren't this stupid. Chopping off one engine takes much more than a hatchet and trying to fly a twin engine with just one is going to make flight very unstable. There would likely be no fuel raccoons even if it could be done in flight. I could go on and on but it's not worth the effort.

This fails on so many levels that I couldn't even enjoy mocking it. A waste of their money and my time.

Project X (1968)

Dull, implausible, laughable

[3/10 · 24 January 2016]

This rates three stars for the humor I found in its plot holes, bad animation and ludicrous plot. It's too bad nobody at MST3K got permission to riff this film.

The premise, that scientists can only retrieve the spy's memories by making him think he's 150 years in the past is never explained sufficiently, it's just a way to avoid using futuristic sets. Even though they create an isolated compound complete with period buildings and antiques gathered from multiple museums they can't seem to keep intruders from using the prop telephone to wrinkle the plot. Nor can they prevent a pretty girl from hiking along to flirt with their test subject and spoiling all their work.

Psychedelic patterns are used to obscure the poorly done matte paintings, action sequences and other "memories". Clear plastic helmets on the military add some unintentional fun as does the Dickensian matron of the "kinery" (sic). Somehow in this future they've stamped out most disease but don't seem to know how to immunize against smallpox and the plague.

I looked forward to seeing this as I never saw it in theaters as a kid but it's far from Castle's best work. This was ambitious but failed to capitalize on it's few good ideas. By the end I half expected Monte Markham to turn out to be Sen Chui in disguise but instead he's just a traitor, ultimately killed by a red mental tornado whipped up by Christopher George's character. You'd think the General would want to harness that as a weapon but no, he just wants to berate scientists.

It! The Terror from Beyond Space (1958)

Fun, cheesy 50s sci-fi movie

[8/10 · 1 August 2015]

This is one of the better sci-fi movies of the 50s, though not the best by any means. It doesn't just make the mistake of using handguns aboard a rocketship which can lead to explosive decompression, the crew also uses blowtorches, bazookas and hand grenades. But it's all in good fun if you're willing to allow for such ineptness which actually adds a certain kind of charm and the cast plays it seriously enough.

The premise is unusual in that it begins with an already failed mission which requires a rescue mission and the main protagonist is cast in a dubious light at the start. The monster is a man in a rubber suit with all the flaws typical of 50s era effects including a visible zipper and so forth but it's still a bit scary for a youngster. Even more so when it's wailing in silhouette on a crew member but it is far from a horror movie. The "monster" is very unlikely to frighten anyone over 8 or 9 I think, given what they generally see on TV, very fake-looking by our standards today.

The ship itself has control gauges instead of the many blinking lights that were so popular in the 60s thru the 80s, I can't say which is more annoying but at least a gauge is easy for the audience to read. The acting is not what makes the show enjoyable as it's just a monster in space movie but at least the characters make some effort to think ahead and formulate a plan instead of just charging around. No, wait, they do that once too.

Enjoy it for what it is, a fairly short and entertaining film about a botched trip to Mars that encounters a very improbable big Martian survivor turned monster who wants to drink blood thru his big rubbery teeth and lips. Best to watch with a friend who likes to poke fun at movies but it's also enjoyable as what it is, B-grade but not schlock sci-fi. Solid B-grade at that. I gave it an 8 because I loved watching this as a kid on late-night TV, but it really only deserves a 7 I suppose.

Remains (II) (2011)

4/10 is a generous rating for this

[4/10 · 28 May 2013]

The story is somewhat nonsensical and the acting is uneven from average to poor - even from actors I enjoy in other projects. It was interesting to see Terry Schappert (always funny on Red Eye) and Lance Reddick (Agent Broyles on Fringe) but their scenes were brief and confusing. Bad guys? Good guys? Infected or not? If the writer doesn't care then why should I care? Still, Tom's decision to betray them by unleashing zombies on them was the stupidest and most evil decision in the script. Hey, if you don't want to go with them ask Cindy to get her daddy's permission instead of getting most of them killed.

The four main characters were weakly drawn stereotypes, especially the female lead who one moment thought all of humanity was a waste and the next would do anything to survive. As for Victor, if you just saw him betray a guy by throwing him to the zombies, why would you let him into your refuge? The elderly woman gambler wins the prize for the worst make-up/FX I recall seeing in years, followed closely by the very poor CGI of Cindy's jeep overturning.

The only original idea was the giant human hamster wheel which was unexpected and amusing. Also funny was how none of the zombies at the front entrance did more than tap on the glass doors and windows, even when fresh meat was in plain sight. The source of the infection was only alluded to but might have been original if only they'd taken 10 seconds to explain it.

Two last notes. When surrounded by a large group pointing guns at you and warning you not to reach behind you - don't ignore them. And when facing a horde of zombies try to find at least a heavy pipe or other weapon and remember to keep it nearby. Fist-fighting with the undead doesn't seem effective.

All in all this is in my top 100 zombie movies but nowhere near the top of that list. With a better script and larger budget (better CGI/FX and direction) this could have been a pretty good movie.

4:44 Last Day on Earth (2011)

Somewhat interesting, mostly annoying

[4/10 · 2 May 2012]

I'm rounding down from the 4.4 this movie deserves. Without Dafoe I would probably have turned it off after five minutes but his character wasn't interesting enough to make this worthwhile.

What is the premise of the movie beyond the fact we've destroyed the ozone layer (which I thought was rebounding nicely which implies poor research for the script)? That despite the world ending there won't be people so crazed that they'd engage in mass looting and riots. That's not human experience to date before, during or after catastrophe. Why would anyone choose to spend their last day selling or working when they could spend that time with loved ones? Do none of them have family or loved ones or something they'd rather be doing? Both ideas are preposterous.

So our "sinning" by abusing CFC products to deplete the ozone leads to punishment without hope of redemption which is pointless. Al Gore is only on briefly but he's still ponderous, pompous and wrong. Besides which he was warning of warming not ozone depletion so his presence is a mystery. I did appreciate that the female lead demanded his interview be turned off for being annoying.

That leaves us with a few false premises: human nature suddenly changing for the good (or at least the mundane), that we're somehow the cause of the world's end, and that ozone levels are falling rapidly (they are not, thus far the total decline is 3-6%), and that we would do nothing to stop this disaster. If we did face a global catastrophe then we would likely launch orbital factories to produce ozone from nearby oxygen or find a way to eliminate CFC sooner than happens naturally. But science is always just a doom-sayer or the cause of the doom in movies like this.

I was surprised by the length of the initial sex scene. If you want to see a prolonged sex scene with nudity you would probably seek out even more graphic material with better-looking performers. I'm not sure who these scenes were intended for but they were just a distraction that I had to fast-forward through.

I would not recommend this movie to anyone but a die-hard Dafoe fan, I only sat through this since he was in it, or to someone who must watch every available movie about the world ending.

The Devil's Tomb (2009)

At least it borrows from good films

[5/10 · 8 March 2012]

Take ideas and plot points from Alien, Aliens, Event Horizon, and (especially) Prince of Darkness and add some absurdity, sprinkle with blood and implausible characters and this is what you get.

Those were all vastly better films but this isn't quite as horrible as some junk on SyFy so if it's free to watch you could do worse. I gave it a 5 due to some familiar faces in the cast and the job they do and the average-looking blood and gore. Story-wise they didn't seem to put much effort into it besides "adapting" from better movies. Also amusing were the military tactics used in the Iraq flashbacks but I'm not sure they meant for me to chuckle during the battle scenes.

If you want a much better film along the same lines, watch Prince of Darkness instead and during the slow parts imagine space marines using electronic trackers that never seem to work, dodging acid-spewing creatures while running into long-dead loved ones without wondering how they happened to be there. The 5 is generous in my opinion but this could have been a lot worse.

The Dead (2010)

Surprisingly good

[7/10 · 27 November 2011]

The bad: Despite clear signs that only headshots will work most of the characters shoot bursts into torsos or otherwise fail to learn this lesson but that's common in zombie movies. Despite most action taking place far from any village/town there seemed to be as many zombies per square mile as in any urban center. The Prince seems to favor well- tailored uniforms over off-the-rack. Instead of taking turns sleeping while one drives or stands watch they both sleep at the same time with predictable results. BTW, if you get bitten do not expect me to carry you on my back - at all. And instead of emptying my canteen into the radiator I think I'd try a readily available bodily fluid first.

The good: Neither of the main characters makes many rash or stupid choices which was a nice change of pace. Good acting with the exception of the American engineer, a huge cast with no rednecks, not as much squabbling as in most zombie flicks, lots of visual appeal and interesting settings and good special effects without CGI. For a zombie movie it is fairly slow but overall it's worth a look.

The Survivor (1998)

Abysmal

[22 September 2011]

This is a terrible movie in nearly every way, so bad it's not even fun to mock. Your first clue about how bad this movie will be is in the opening credits, the company that backed the movie was named "Puerto Rican Investors' Tax Credit Film Fund. If they have so little imagination in naming that group, how much imagination will the movie have? Zero. It borrows from a dozen far superior movies (No Escape and Mad Max to name two), has no pacing or believable dialog, acting that ranges from poor to awful (Richard Moll how could you?), and a story that tries to be complex but is only tedious. As another review says, it's supposedly set in a distant future where the Earth is long- abandoned yet they wear clothing and carry weapons identical to what we use today while following military protocol a group of grade-school laser taggers would ridicule.

I only watched this because the Movie Channel listing was very inaccurate, I only wish I'd seen the movie about an alien thawing in the Arctic to try to take over the Earth. That would be derivative but almost certainly better than this dreck. Do yourself a favor and look at an empty aquarium for 90 minutes instead.

Whisper (I) (2007)

Much better than I expected

[28 August 2011]

Ordinarily I wouldn't have watched this movie since I hadn't heard a thing about it and the cover looked a bit cheesy. But there wasn't much else available so I took a gamble. We sat down to watch it with low expectations and after a somewhat shaky start it became so scary my wife bailed out and I had to watch the last half alone. Overall the character development is adequate for this type of movie but a bit implausible at times.

** spoiler ahead **

There were some familiar faces in this, when Sydney (Michael Rooker in a minor but well-done role)died I felt like I did when I watched Deep Blue Sea where Samuel L. Jackson bought it early on. I can see that Josh was played by a guy who was on Lost but I've never seen that show. I was pleased to see Gus from Psych in a serious role and his fate was a bit of a surprise, too. And Teryl Rothery from Stargate was good as the adoptive mother of "poor little David."

The methods used for the killings is typical, heart attack and falling thru the ice which is good since the kid never wants to be connected to any of the deaths. The kid playing David who forces the deaths is eerie right from the start. It looked like David not only expected abduction but was happy to go along. They did telegraph the identity of the "mastermind" or at least I figured it out before the show was half over, but the reveal was still fun. The ending was quite clever with Josh deafening himself to obviate the kid's whispering and the final blow was surprisingly not upsetting. By then David was not a kid in my mind at all so they could have blown him up and I wouldn't have cared. It was done more or less in shadow so it's not explicit at all.

They don't waste time trying to explain the kid's abilities, probably a mix of his artwork and whispering, so it's left up to the viewer to decide how he can do what he does which makes plot-holes much less likely. If it's whispers how can he control events miles away or even know about them? But if it's partly his drawings then who knows what he can do which was smarter than I expected.

Acting, sets, wardrobe and script were all well-done and the SFX with the wolves was subdued but effective. I'm glad they didn't explain how the kid does things or how he got his abilities so it's not necessarily the "evil angel" he seems to suggest. Well worth the rental and if it's on TV for free I'd recommend it. It's unusual to sympathize with the bad guy/kidnappers but compared to the creepy-eyed kid it's not hard to do so with the exception of the third male kidnapper, Vince I think. He's so thoroughly unlikeable that I had hoped he'd be the first victim. A tiny complaint is that the girl, Roxanne, appeared to mother the kid too much and too early but that could be explained by her guilty conscience. 9/10 and I'll look for it again in the future.

Double Identity (2009)

Not horrible but not good either

[4/10 · 16 June 2011]

The premise itself is silly if you think the reason the girl, Katrine, helps Kilmer's character is that quick kiss at the start. I thought she only helped him because she didn't want an innocent guy killed just so the cartel can make more money. What is silly is that a guy smart enough to become a doctor is dumb enough to do absolutely nothing to change his appearance even after he sees his photo on the front page of the newspaper. No shaving of the beard, no haircut, no hair dye, in fact he doesn't even change out of his tuxedo jacket until someone tells him to do so. Most 10-year-olds are far better at hide and seek than his character.

I found the use of cell phones in the early 1990s to be so dumb it was funny and about what you'd expect of such a lackluster story. Some filmmakers seem to think that if you don't have a good story it will go unnoticed if you add enough twists and turns. Not so in this case. Kilmer didn't even try to do well or even act interested. The performances from everyone else ranged from good to excellent and the actress playing Katrine will hopefully go on to much better films than this, she's certainly pretty and talented enough. Kilmer seems to be following in Steven Segal's footsteps but if he dieted and worked harder he could still hope for better.

Jack Frost (1997 Video)

Fairly effective self-parody

[7/10 · 17 January 2011]

I liked this movie but I'm a bit biased because I didn't have to pay to see it. When it's free on the Chiller channel I keep my hopes in check but for a time-waster on a down day it was better than I expected.

It is a parody with some gore and the humor is only fair. The whole idea is funny though as is the serious treatment given by all the actors. It must have been hard to emote when you're facing an obviously fake "snowman" in a rubber suit. It's also amusing that it was filmed without the benefit of snow for the most part so there are scenes of a snowman contest where the only snow is the fake stuff on a green lawn. No snow on the roads or trees or cars, just on the lawn which was funny somehow.

The characters do the typically stupid things required in most horror movies such as splitting up, taking for granted the thing is destroyed or running away after knocking it back on it's heels. There was a little humor that was actually funny but for the most part it relies on the ridiculous situation and that's enough. There is of course a mad scientist involved which explains how Jack Frost became a snowman serial killer but like all mad scientists he doesn't want the proof of his genius destroyed until it's too late for him.

The special effects including the very fake-looking snow used in some scenes would be a drawback if this were a serious film. As it doesn't take itself seriously I can't hold that against it. The villain is a very bad guy so some of his murders are not very holiday-friendly but for a horror movie it didn't go overboard. All in all a movie I expected to dislike and make fun it but I ended up feeling positive about it. Don't confuse this with the Michael Keaton movie or your kids will have a hard time sleeping afterwards.

Dark Rising (2007 Video)

Wow, awesomely bad movie

[3/10 · 15 January 2011]

The actors in this movie did try and it shows, but the script and story were just awful. The brief nude scenes (topless girls x 2) were very gratuitous but the lesbian scene was totally unnecessary since one of the girls is killed soon after.

The humor is lame but they do try to lighten things up. The story is convoluted and vapid with a blend of science and witchcraft and nonsense. At one point the "scientist" father reads words that make an incantation and open a dimensional portal. Uh-huh. That's right up there with the spaceship in Kingdom of the Crystal Skulls which added a redundant dimensional portal. This is more forgivable as it's clearly done on a tiny budget but if you're mixing magic with science try to make it a little bit sensible and have a witch do the magic and let the scientist do science.

The acting isn't terrible but it's very uneven. The girls are all attractive and fairly sympathetic but I wanted to turn into a beast to kill both of the male actors. One is so pathetic and clingy he's hard to take, the other starts at the other extreme but turns coward at the end. And the ending. Wow. Build sympathy for the mousy girl only to have her neck broken in an instant and never seen again. The coward somehow gains fighting skills to take on the warrior girl who has honed her skills in the other dimension for most of her life. Yet he beats her down. Finally the wimp and warrior girl get re-united and somehow a bunch of freaky vigilantes show up out of nowhere to help out...and then it ends. I'm really hoping they don't plan on a sequel, the flashes of talent that came through here should be put to better use than continuing this story.

The music tended to be too loud and didn't fit too well but it was the highlight of the movie I'm afraid. I might have missed some finer points because I watched parts of it on fast-forward on my DVR as it was just painful to listen to the dialog.

Black Ops (2008 Video)

Not the worst movie I've ever seen...

[4/10 · 9 July 2010]

It comes close to being the worst movie I've seen this year. Lance Henriksen must have lost a bet or been really desperate to make his car payment to appear in this. His acting is okay, given the crap script but the male lead has all the charisma of his favorite weapon, a shovel. The girl was a stupid and pointless character, only there to star in a brief topless shower scene. And the villain? Well it turns out it's the good ole USA since nothing but the guiding spirit of an undead Nazi super-soldier could possibly explain the liberation of Iraq or the War on Terror, right? Evidently a totally different writer took over for the last ten minutes of the film or else he ran out of coke and ideas.

This might be worthwhile to rag on with friends or if you're a big fan of Henriksen (the reason I watched) or the female lead (Kate Randolph looks too skinny here), but otherwise stay away. As horror or anything else it fails. Even the gore was hilariously inept such as someone with a freshly stabbed eyesocket that looks like rubber with dried blood on it. And it reminded me a little of the old teen slasher flicks since the girl decides to shower in the midst of the gory murder and mayhem and has no gun or protection while she does it.

9 Miles Down (2009)

Entertaining enough

[6/10 · 9 June 2010]

I'm tempted to give this a higher rating than I think it deserves simply because of some of the hate I'm seeing in the reviews. No, this isn't a blockbuster and it won't win any awards but as a B-movie it works well enough. The acting and story are decent and the theme is intriguing. Namely, is Hell a real place or something we create in our own minds?

My main complaint is about the nudity. I lost count of how many times the male star's butt was on-screen, sometimes for several seconds. At least there was a very brief shot of the female star's behind as some recompense but it was too little too late.

In short, this isn't an action or even a real horror film and it can be confusing, but in the end I liked it. Compared to a lot of junk I've had to pay to sit through at theaters, this was worth a viewing.

Blood: The Last Vampire (2009)

Surprisingly enjoyable

[7/10 · 30 March 2010]

I enjoyed this movie more than I expected but I've never seen the anime it's based on so that might be part of the reason. I thought the effects and acting were mostly good with the exception of one fight scene and the actor who plays the head demon. I see some criticism of the blood effects but I took that to be the difference between human and vampire blood. The fact that Saya easily beat many of the vampires didn't strike me as odd since the movie refers to her lifelong training. The vamps on the other hand have relied on anonymity and numbers to survive so why would you expect them to fight as well as Saya? I thought the Council was a somewhat unneeded element but it probably was explained better in the anime series. They could have fleshed out the conflict with the vampires and Onigen instead but it did add a Men in Black aspect to the film. They really captured base life in Japan during the Vietnam era I think, right down to the vehicles, clothing and attitudes, but this part of the movie is fairly brief.

I agree that the Alice character could have been truncated or omitted but no doubt she was included to add a relatable American character. I don't think it was necessary and she didn't help Saya and did a lot of whining. She also survived falls that should have killed or incapacitated her since she's not a demon or a vampire like Saya. But she was somewhat cute and less intense than Saya.

Saya is the star and the actor portraying her was the best thing about the movie, conveying the misery of her past and her fanatical need to meet Onigen at the expense of anything and anyone else. Until she met Alice which undercut her mission and focus.

My complaints are mostly with the CGI of the winged demon, the somewhat anti-climactic face-off with Saya and Onigen, and the time spent on Alice. Overall it was better than I expected. Then again I didn't pay to see it and had low expectations from the start.

Dark Relic (2010 TV Movie)

What a waste of time and talent (some spoilers)

[2/10 · 28 March 2010]

When I saw James Frain (from the Tudors series), I thought this might rise above most SyFy dreck. In some ways it does since the special effects aren't always terrible and some of the acting is almost good. The story is very weak, at times incoherent and it's likely to offend some. Continuity errors abound and reaction shots are laughable at times.

Spoilers: one of the worst effects is the CGI wolves that attack the party in the woods. I'm pretty sure you could animate a better wolf at home with free software than this. The demon is generally nearly as realistic as he was in the video game Diablo II but it's size seems to vary a great deal depending on the shot.

The premise is very odd in that the Holy Cross, a religious relic that has traditionally been thought to be beneficial is somehow tainted and causes the demon(s) to follow and attack the party carrying it from the Crusades, sometimes preceding them somehow to possess monks etc. The fact it's immune to a crucifix but susceptible to a talisman the Muslim warrior (Alyy Khan) carries seems a tad offensive. The Cross is evil, the Muslim talisman is holy - what message are they trying to send? In typical fashion, after the non-whites have saved the "hero" many times they're struck down in a very ignominious way and for no real reason other than to leave the stage clear for the hero. Just to show they can't be consistent, the tainted relic of the Cross is then shoved down the demon's throat to destroy him which thoroughly muddles things in time for a very abrupt ending.

Even for free this is worthless unless you like to make fun of bad movies with your friends. Some talented actors were wasted here.

The Terror Within (1989)

Totally rips off Alien

[3/10 · 15 November 2006]

Did the makers get sued by Ridley Scott or the production company behind Alien? It's impossible to spoil this movie but I hate to mention the many times it blatantly rips-off Alien, a far superior film. Maybe it was done as a kind of tribute, either that or it was done with contempt. They duplicate dialogue, plot lines and weapons/tactics to the point it's ridiculous. They even have a 'chest-burster', except it's a 'fetus' that bursts from the mother's belly. Even the banter between the crew is directly from Alien, with very minor changes. The acting is vastly inferior, along with effects and sets, I'm sure I've seen the same rubber suited creature in at least one other low-budget film.

Oh, sorry, I did notice one major difference. Instead of a cat that gets in the way of the hunt, it's a dog. This was one of the few times I actively cheered for the 'alien' to devour all the crew members (and hopefully the producer and director).

War of the Worlds (2005 Video)

Horrifyingly bad movie

[1/10 · 25 June 2006]

It was amazing to see C. Thomas Howell and some other recognizable faces in this gratingly bad movie. Try as I might, I can't come up with a single positive comment, other than the fact that I'd TIVO'd it so I was able to fast forward thru some of the worst.

It features poor special effects, though not quite as bad as some Sci-Fi channel 'efforts', a script full of false starts and shocks that are merely dreams of the main character, and acting I would be disappointed to see in a college production. I found it muddled and confusing right to the end with scenes that didn't fit with the story or the ideas behind the original book.

What's worse were the continual religious references and diatribes, for no apparent purpose. Granted, HG Wells expressed similar questions and maybe this was done as a counter-point to the somewhat hokey ending to the original and still classic version of the 50s but I found this mildly offensive as well as pointless. I've seen worse from Sci-Fi Channel but that's hardly an endorsement.