Ghostbusters (2016)

Summary 
Following a ghost invasion of Manhattan, paranormal enthusiasts Erin Gilbert and Abby Yates, nuclear engineer Jillian Holtzmann, and subway worker Patty Tolan band together to stop the otherworldly threat.

Genre : Fantasy/Comedy
Country : USA

Cast : 
Kristen Wiig : Erin Gilbert

Melissa McCarthy : Abby Yates
Kate McKinnon : Jillian Holtzmann
Leslie Jones : Patty Tolan

Director : Paul Feig

My opinion

“I'm Ed Mulgrave.
I'm the historian at the Aldridge Mansion,
and I believe it's haunted.
If you could just come take a look.“

There's one thing I'm firmly convinced of. And that's to stay clear of milestones in film history. A milestone is a film that isn't necessarily brilliant or an absolute masterpiece, but it made a particular impression on me. For instance "Evil Dead". For me that movie is a milestone because this was the first real horror I watched and I afterwards I wasn't haunted by traumatic nightmares. When I left the cinema hall after watching "Grease", I thought I was as tough and cool as Danny. "Back to the Future" remains a rock-solid classic for me. And "Ghostbusters" from 1984 was also such a milestone. It became a kind of a hype and it'll still be appreciated by film lovers after 50 years and broadcasted on television on Saturdaynight. I'm sure no one will remember this remake after lets say a year. It may safely be added to the list of unnecessary made and totally failed remakes in the history of motion pictures.

The highlight of this film is the appearance of the original Ghostbusters actors: Bill Murray, Dan Aykroyd, Ernie Hudson and a bust of Harold Ramis (who unfortunately died in 2014). And the funniest thing is that Murray plays a skeptic who doesn't believe in the existence of ghosts. And strangely enough, Chris "Thor" Hemsworth was the funniest character from the new cast. Funny, the majority thinks the opposite about these two last facts. For the rest, this is simply a duplicate of the original film. The storyline is almost identical (with some minor adaptations). The biggest difference are the special effects. They look sophisticated and are very impressive compared to those of 32 years ago (quite obviously) and a Ghostbusters team that consists entirely of women. I don't have a problem with that. But nonetheless it's still not clear to me why they've chosen this option.

Maybe it's me or the fact that the nostalgic value of this film is very high. Perhaps the opinion about this film will be different if you're from a younger generation and you've never seen the first version. Sure, in that case it's still brand new and highly original. But someone like me who's part of an older generation and who has enjoyed the original film, just sees a duplicate, full of recycled ideas and reused objects, infused with not so humorous humor. Admit it, when you smile more about the fumbling of a hunk, who impersonated "Thor" once, this raises all kind of questions. Maybe it's because I have no affinity with the female so-called humorous actress Melissa McCarthy. I thought "The Heat" was horrible. And I pulled the plug on "Spy" after half an hour because I was bursting into tears rather than in laughter. Who you gonna call? Not these ghostbusters for sure ...

Nonetheless, it's admirable they persisted in making this reboot. You don't need to be a genius to realize that this version would be overshadowed by its predecessor and would never manage to beat it. And if you don't have a unique storyline and all kinds of objects from the first film are used again (the paranormal apparitions Slimer and the Marsh Mellow Man, the famous tune, their headquarter and the Ghostbusters vehicle), there's only one thing that remains : the interaction between the main characters and the humor. And even that was toe-curling bad and irritating. The humor used by Bill Murray and Dan Aykroyd was so natural, genuin and ingenuous. What's demonstrated here is so plastic and as implausible as the ghostly entities that flood New York City. Well, I stand by my first statement. Milestones are untouchable.

My rating 2/10
Links : IMDB

Urge (2016)

Summary 
A weekend getaway takes a dangerous turn when a mysterious nightclub owner introduces a group of friends to a new designer drug. Stripped of their inhibitions, they start living out their wildest fantasies - but what starts out as a fun night of partying quickly turns deadly, as the island paradise deteriorates into a tropical madhouse.

Genre : Thriller
Country : USA

Cast : 
Pierce Brosnan : The Man

Danny Masterson : Neil
Justin Chatwin : Jason

Director : Aaron Kaufman

My opinion : 

“This weekend's gonna be epic.”

How the hell did the makers of "Urge" convince Pierce Brosnan to join them? Pierce Brosnan, better known as the legendary 007 and his participation in light humorous romantic comedies. And sometimes he even tries to showcase his musical talent, as in "Mamma Mia!" for example. But I've never seen this top gentleman as devilish and evil as here. The acting of Brosnan is also the only positive part in this movie. And also the only thing that fascinated me.

Neil (Danny Masterson) is a young, wealthy entrepreneur, who's used to a life where he gets everything. An arrogant guy whose group of friends probably consists of artificial friendships that live off his amassed fortune. One day he and his so-called friends Vick (Chris Geere), Danny (Nick Thune), Joey (Alexis Knapp) and Denise (Bar Paly) go to an island to enjoy a great weekend together in his ultra- modern villa. This could well be an epic weekend. That's what he promised his secretary and semi-lover Theresa (Ashley Greene). However, there are two surprises awaiting them. The first in the form of Jason (Justin Chatwin), the uninvited would-be artist and enfant terrible, but yet Neil's bosom friend. And the second surprise is the drug "Urge" which is presented to them in the exclusive nightclub Volcano.

 

Clearly it's not a typical night club. There are eyes projected at the wall and randomly they choose someone to grant him exclusive access to the club. Once inside they are welcomed by a kind of Oompa Loompa person. And the audience seems to be under the influence of some chemical drug. The moment Jason meets the charismatic and Delmore Schwartz citing owner, who's known as "The Man", he's offered an exceptional brand new drug. A unique experience will await him and his friends. Provided they only use it once. Too bad for Jason. Seems like it has no effect on him.

It will come as no surprise that this gang of idiots will break the golden rule. The result is complete hysteria with everyone's deepest desires and bizarre fantasies taking an unrestrained form. With all its consequences. An outbreak of violence and sadistic savagery is the result. A kind of "Clockwork Orange" frenzy. And this hysteria takes over the entire island. It seems as if the entire population has consumed a bit to much "Urge" and forgot about that important rule.

Afterwards I was wondering what the ultimate message was behind this story. What was it the creators wanted to show? The decay of our society? The danger of hallucinogens and other chemical mess? Or were they trying to prove that each individual has a dark side? Actually, I expected a kind of sado masochistic story after seeing those ladies with delicious curves and dressed in red latex in the beginning of the movie. Ultimately, "Urge" is like a space cake without space. Or a mushroom that should give you hallucinations, but turns out to be an innocent champignon. Nothing mind-blowing or exciting. Afterwards you'll get a sort of Machiavellian interpretation, but the meaningless and disappointing ending spoiled it somewhat. It would have been sublime if a package of "Urge" was being delivered with this film. Just to keep an open mind, while watching this rather disappointing film.

My rating 2/10
Links : IMDB

Precious Cargo (2016)

Summary :

After a botched heist, Eddie, a murderous crime boss, hunts down the seductive thief Karen who failed him. In order to win back Eddie's trust, Karen recruits her ex-lover and premier thief Jack to steal a cargo of rare precious gems. But when the job goes down, allegiances are betrayed and lines are crossed as Jack, Karen, and Eddie face off in a fateful showdown. 

Genre : Action
Country : Canada

Cast :
RMark-Paul Gosselaar : Jack
Bruce Willis : Eddie
Claire Forlani : Karen

Director : Max Adams

My Opinion   

“The fact that you borrow my dog in order to trick your veterinarian girlfriend
to thinking you're an animal lover is pathetic.
I am an animal lover, I'm just not an animal owner.”

It's official. This was the last movie with Bruce Willis I wasted my time on. Whenever I expect a come-back from my eternal hero, I'm always disappointed afterwards and realize that apparently the check size was more important than the content of the film or an enthusiastic commitment. And probably the salary wasn't high enough after seeing the intensity of that commitment and enthusiasm. A head of lettuce in my father's garden shows more drama and empathy than Mr. Willis in this pseudo-action crime story. Look at his expression when Jack (Mark-Paul Gosselaar) blows up a car in front of his hotel. Painful. A horrible moment for a Willis fan like me. I would rather throw the lettuce from my father's garden towards the screen.

Eventually Willis wasn't such a bad choice after all, since the rest of the movie is as bad. When will directors finally realize that a crime movie gets the labeled "immortal" pinned on because it contains an unprecedented and fascinating story in which passionate and charismatic actors appear. And it's not the amount of ammunition that's used throughout the film that'll make you earn that label. The gunfights in "Precious Cargo" are so irritating bad and ridiculously exaggerated. I think they've used as much ammunition as during the landing at Normandy. Statistically speaking it isn't such a bad idea. They are all such bad shooters that they might have a chance to hit something after shooting so intensively. One stray bullet is sufficient. Even Stevie Wonder would be a better shooter. And every time I'm wondering what material most objects are made of, because they can withstand a huge amount of bullets every time.

 

Mark-Paul Gosselaar wasn't so bad. Although I didn't understand where he got the title "Michelangelo of Thieves" from, because he wasn't particularly intelligent. When you're so stupid to fall for a ridiculous lie of an ex-girlfriend and blindly consider an alleged pregnancy as true, you're certainly not blessed with a well functioning brain. Luckily I didn't recognize him immediately as the more mature version of Zack from "Saved by the bell", otherwise I would have given up much earlier, because this was one of the most annoying televisionseries from the 80'. Claire Forlani is an elegant appearance and tried her best to act believable as the pregnant ex (who could cope with hectic situations despite her condition). Needless to say she began to irritate me after a while as well.

Compared with this, "American Heist" was highly enjoyable. Expect a series of clichés. Like the macho-style and tough language used whenever possible. This leads to embarrassing moments like the one where Christoph Rob Rowen puts some silicone-filled blonde bimbo's in their place. The gang members keep appearing from every corner throughout the whole movie while their arsenal of weapons increases visibly. There's the semi-romantic entanglement between Jack and his ex on the one hand and on the other hand one with his new girlfriend, veterinarian Jenna (Lydia Hull) who imagined a romantic dinner quite different. In the end apparantly she finds Jack's lifestyle just normal.

Is there really nothing positive to say about this film? Yes, there's still one bright spot in it. And that's Logan, played by Jenna B. Kelly. She's not only a dazzling beauty but also she expresses herself in an amusing way. Definitely she's someone to handle with kid gloves. But at the same time I'm sure she'll probably becomes extremely enjoyable as she starts to purr. If I was Jack, I would consider her to become my girlfriend, instead of the other two nitwits. Afterwards I noticed how many participating actors were also present in "Extraction". If I knew this in advance, I wouldn't even bother to watch this monstrosity in the first place.

My rating 2/10
Links : IMDB

Jeruzalem (2015)

Summary :
When a couple of American young adults fly to Israel to visit the city of Jerusalem, a biblical nightmare falls upon the city.

Genre : Horror
Country : Israel

Cast :
Yael Grobglas : Rachel
Danielle Jadelyn : Sarah
Yon Tumarkin : Major Hasan

Director : Doron & Yoav Paz

My Opinion   

“There are three gates to hell.
One in the desert,
one in the ocean
and one in Jerusalem”

Look at the design of the title with the big red central "Z", you expect this to be some sort of "World War Z". Right? What a disappointing film this was eventually. Pure horror. And I'm not talking about the content, but about the entire movie. The only thing in this film that got me excited, were the google glasses. If this electronic gadget works as demonstrated here (apparently it's no longer available), I certainly would love to have one. It looked really cool. The face recognition. The voice activated commands to initiate phone calls, play music and to start a GPS so you can orientate yourself. The robustness of these glasses was also demonstrated here. The girl who got the glasses as a gift from her father, seemed to be quite a labile and unstable girl. But despite falling down some stairs, smacking against the ground out of a hammock and slamming down with a bicycle, the glasses still functioned. After an error message it worked like a charm.

As for the rest, this found footage movie isn't particularly groundbreaking or original. I'll never put this type of movie on my list of favorite genres anyway. Admit it. The principle has been exploited already infinite times since the making of "The Blair Witch project". Occasionally you come across one that's worth to watch in between. But the vast majority are none the less mostly movies with shortcomings on a large scale. Usually the story isn't very original or the performances are shockingly bad. The story-line in "Jeruzalem" gives you the feeling that it could be interesting. The gimmick of the Google glasses gives the film a pleasant and fresh touch. But the moment the apocalypse begins, we are treated to zombie situations that feel as historic as the tourist sites in Jerusalem.

There appear to be quite a few gates to hell in our world (as said in the beginning of the movie). Turns out there's one in Jerusalem where our two excited, party girls Sarah (Danielle Jadelyn) and Rachel (Yael Grobglas) accidentally end up. And this thanks to an amateur archaeologist Kevin (Yon Tumarkin) who the two cooing lovebirds meet on the plane. He can persuade them to accompany him to Jerusalem instead of exploring the nightlife of Tel Aviv. What he wants to do in Jerusalem isn't revealed by this sly fox. If he had come clean about it from the outset and told those two gals that he's interested in the recurring phenomenon of zombies, they would have made a different decision probably. So once again it's proven that it's not really smart to let your hormones make the decisions.

It takes a while before hell breaks loose. The city center is hermetically sealed by closing all the gates (apparently these are all magical gates since they are able to stop dangerous looking giants). From that moment on you'll get a nauseating film accompanied by lots of hysterical screaming. Scares are provided by utilizing suddenly emerging zombies (and I have to admit, they look creepy) and fluttering demons.
 

 
However, I could only discover one really exciting situation. This took place in a mental institution where victims of the "Jerusalem syndrome" were being locked up. Unfortunately Sarah was posessed by the annoying habit of staring at her companions all the time, instead of focusing on the demonic creatures. This suppressed the horror level quite a bit. It felt as if the content of the movie was for most part limited to just some touristic sightseeing. Add to that the sometimes contrived and primitive acting and you'll come to the conclusion that it's far from being as brilliant as "World War Z" for example.

My rating 3/10
Links : IMDB

Submerged (2015)

Summary
A young woman and her friends, who've been targeted by kidnappers, must do everything they can to survive after their limo is forced off the road and plunged into a canal.

Genre : Thriller
Country : USA

Cast :
Jonathan Bennett : Matt
Talulah Riley : Jessie
Tim Daly : Hank

Director : Steven C. Miller

My Opinion 

 "Submerged". The only thing I'm excited about is the sublime movie poster. A good example of an excellent graphic design with a brilliant and powerful one-liner  "You can not scream and hold your breath at the same time". Now, the unfortunate teens who are trapped in a sunken limo, haven't hold their breath, I'm sure. On the contrary, there was a lot of shouting to be heard down there. Would I be in such a claustrophobic situation, I would break out in a cold sweat. I really don't like confined spaces. But admit it, being trapped in a limousine at the bottom of a canal, knowing that the pressure on that modest roof must be enormous, while being surrounded by some young hotheads who are acting hysterical and blaming each other, looks like a far worse nightmare.

So if you're expecting an exciting, nerve-racking movie, you'll be brought down to earth with a shock. The moment Matt (Jonathan Bennett) sees the nose of the sophisticated limousine dive into the water, it looks like this might be the start of a promising thriller. Unfortunately you'll subsequently undergo a series of flashbacks that explain the cause of this accident. Also we come to know that Matt has a younger brother, Dylan (Cody Christian), with some personal problems. This seemed like a irrelevant parallel plot. In the end the whole thing leads to Jessie (Talulah Riley). She's the daughter of businessman and millionaire Hank (Tim Daly), who evoked the wrath of the locals due to drastic cutbacks. Therefore, he recruited Matt as his chauffeur and bodyguard to protect him and his daughter from possible reprisals.

The remaining part of the film shows the situation in the sunken limousine and the efforts being made by the youngsters to get out. Matt can't help with this since he's impaled in some way to the car. Jessie lies unconcious next to him after she was being drugged. And the only thing the other hysterical four sitting in the back could come up with, was useless banging on windows and accusing each other of being an accomplice. That's why Matt closes the soundproof partition now and then. Next to a totally implausible denouement, there are also some ridiculous and ludicrous developments. I'm still trying to figure out how the trick with the trunk of the car worked. The designer of this car was very foreseeing. And I'm also pretty sure that a smashed glass roof would cause a devastating flood of water and not only such a pitifully little bit of water.

The most positive part was the running time. It's a short and compact wannabe thriller without much sensational events. Most of it, is already shown elsewhere before. Afterward, it looks more like a thriller-episode of "Melrose Place" or some similar crap teen series from the 80s. Talulah Riley is a spoiled brat that doesn't really excels when it comes to intelligence (look for "Inception" in IMDb and you'll see she plays a "Blonde" there). Actually, the whole gang has a similar level of intelligence. You can  conclude that the idea behind the story is kind of original, but the elaboration failed hugely.

.

My rating 2/10
Links : IMDB

The Subjects (2015)

Summary :
Eight strangers go into a locked room for clinical trials on a new drug that gives them superpowers.

Genre : SF / Thriller
Country : Australia

Cast :
Paul O'Brien : John
Carlotte Nicdao : Lilly
Frank Magree : Giggles

Director : Robert Mond

My Opinion  

"The Subjects" begins abruptly with a commercial about the pharmaceutical company SunSky. Unfortunately the quality of this fragment wasn't maintained the entire movie. As slick and polished as this clip looks like, so limited and dated the rest looks. The entire film takes place in one location. A discarded music studio that looks quite dusty. It's there where the eight guinea pigs are waiting, in order to take part in a medical experiment. You'd expect a high-tech, pharmaceutical company would have a glitzy, modern laboratories to do such experiments. This seemed rather like an out of use, abandoned hangar somewhere in a ghetto.

The eight strangers participating in this experiment are told that they'll take a new type of medication, in the form of a pill, and they need to stay for eight hours in that room. After that period, they can leave and will receive a reward of $ 800. This new chemical substance gives each person some kind of super power. And it looks like they don't have control over it. So you get some ordinary people, in essence insignificant persons, in a difficult situation with no way out. So it entirely degenerates into a tense, psychopathic atmosphere. And this while scientists are observing everything by use of cameras. So they are trapped like rats. Or better, trapped like Guinea pigs. As the title of the film says, they are simply ordinary, manipulable subjects.

The idea had potential enough to make it a fascinating film. However, the development left something to be desired. Partially you can blame the budget. "The Subjects" meets all the requirements of a low-budget B-movie. The actors are total strangers, the setting where everything takes place looks cheap and the effects are taken out of a vintage bag of tricks. The only thing this film could save would be a strong, original story and some brilliant performances. Unfortunately it goes wrong in that area as well.

The actors play a variety of personalities, ranging from extremely annoying to highly entertaining. Most annoying characters are Jenna (Emily Wheaton) and Devin (Spencer McLaren). The first was the height of stupidity. A conceited, narcissistic bimbo whose only purpose in life is to attend as many parties as possible. Devin is a nasty, aggressive guy who fortunately experiences the unpleasant side effects of the pill first. Corey (Paul-Henri) is the weirdo of the company. Someone who was at Woodstock I guess and I'm sure he used some other pills. John (Paul O'Brien) can be seen as the most normal and relaxed person. The magic tricks he knew were a little bland. After his first childish demonstration I was convinced that this would be important in the complete story. Nikki (Katharine Ines) is the appropriate person to complement John. A seemingly very normal, nice looking woman who prefers to reveal nothing about herself. Lilly (Charlotte Nicdao) is a timid girl. She's the complete opposite of Giggles (Frank Magree), an Australian big mouth. The latter created a bit of animo and evoked a few chuckles from me. Highly amusing. And somewhere at the end, Phil (Tosh Greenslade) shows up. His pill had one of the most interesting effects.

A colorful group which ensures some lively conversations. But the special effects were incredibly bad. Especially what happened to Devin was poorly displayed. The superpowers weren't very original either. I wondered what's so special about a force that enables you to change color. The most imaginative powers were the teleportation part and time travelling. Lilly, however, suddenly emerging as an expert in time travel, was a bit nonsensical and quite a coincidence. You're witnessing the whole movie how individuals get into a panicked state and how these characters interact and react to each other. It's not really exciting and there are too many aspects that remain unclear. A unique concept, though. But my view about Australian films being among the better movies generally, is being undermined a bit with this film.

My rating 2/10
Links : IMDB