Godzilla: Final Wars (2004)

Godzilla: Final Wars (2004)

Download torrent at :

http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4177000/Godzilla-Toho_Ultimate_38_Movie_Collection_(Hx3)

OK. I haven't seen all the Godzilla films yet, apart from some of the more popular (Gojira (Godzilla 1) , The Return Of Godzilla (Godzilla 1985) and the American remake, Godzilla (1998) and a few others. So with my lack of knowledge of the exact details of a lot of the Godzilla mythos, viewing Godzilla : Final Wars was a little confusing. But thats to be expected, I mean I can't expect to dip into the 28th chapter of a series and be able to follow it all can I?

That being said, I was surprised that for the touted final Godzilla film (although Toho are planning to bring him back in a year or three) Godzilla : Final Wars has very little Godzilla or any other monster in it for the first half (and a bit) of the film. What we do get is a short scene packing our monster fix in, (without Godzilla) and then suddenly they vanish.

This is where the plot really starts. The monsters have been taken by space aliens (X-ians, because they come from Planet X), who have done this to "help" mankind.

Of course anyone who has seen "V" knows this is pure "bullplop". Human kind obviously and predictably has a small group who rebel and fight back. This group, as you you would expect is a group of martial arts performing mutants. (True) Pretty soon however the Xians true nature is revealed and they unleash all the monsters they previously removed upon the Earth.

So in all this, where's our hero Godzilla? Well he's frozen in Ice after his last fight with humanity. Being the undefeatable opponent he is, it is decided to release him, lure him to Tokyo so he can help defeat the barrage of monsters that have been unleashed.

So thats the setup to the climax, which is the typical Godzilla battle scene.

The battle scenes involving Godzilla, (and the other monsters such as Mothra, Zilla (the Japanese name for the monster in the American remake of Godzilla), Rodan etc are fairly well done with pretty good special effects, although still retaining the Godzilla feel of a rubber suited man in a scale model of Tokyo. As an Australian though, I did like the fight between Godzilla and Zilla, that was set in Sydney.

Godzilla : Final Wars may have been better for me if I had watched all the others in order and not skipped about to it. However I think even so, I'd prefer my Godzilla films to star Godzilla and not a bunch of mutant ninjas.

Two and a half Darios

A Nightmare On Elm Street (1984)

A Nightmare On Elm Street (1984)


Director/Writer(s): Wes Craven

Cast: John Saxon, Ronee Blakley, Heather Langenkamp, Amanda Wyss, Jsu Garcia, Johnny Depp.

Genre: Horror / Mystery / Thriller


Plot Outline: A group of high school friends are being slaughtered in their sleep by the hideous fiend of their shared dreams. When the police ignore her explanation, one girl must confront the killer in his shadowy realm.


Download link: http://anonym.to/?http://www.megaupload.com/?d=DMVJNPUW

This has got to be one of the best ideas ever for a movie. Supposedly based on some "unrelated articles" in a Los Angeles newspaper, Wes Craven , already riding high on The Hills Have Eyes and Last House On The Left, crafted this movie about a killer who stalks a group of teenagers through their dreams.

Of course, just about everyone would know that already. There wouldn't be too many people who don't already know who Freddy Krueger is. What some of them haven't done is actually watched the film.

Taken as a stand alone film, and not the first chapter in a series of 8 films (counting Wes Craven's New Nightmare and Freddy vs Jason as chapters 7 and 8), A Nightmare On Elm Street is a well crafted piece of art. The articles in the newspaper that sparked off Craven's idea, dealt with young people who had escaped the Pol Pot regieme in Cambodia, escaped to America and who died in their sleep. Apparantly they had been sufferring terrible nightmares, and became terrified to go to sleep. Eventually, when they slept and dreamed, they died. (For those interested in a study of this type of event, Hmong Sudden Unexpected Nocturnal Death Syndrome, there is a 100+ page paper on it located here : http://www.reninc.org/BOOKSHELF/Hmong%20Sudden%20Unexpected%20Nocturnal%20Death%20Syndrome,%20Bliatout,%20Bruce.pdf )

Wes Craven took this interesting little event, joined it with something he sees as the worst evil in the world and created a very effective horror film. Originally Freddy Krueger was portrayed as a child molester as well as a child killer. This was toned down in the final edit, perhaps audiences in 1984 didnt want molestation to be a driving plot point in movies, so this aspect of Freddy's character in shown in subtext, while his child killing activities are pushed to the forefront of his character.

So what do we have? Well, we have a group of kids who all seem to be having nightmares. At the same time. About the same man. A man they've not seen before. And he's trying to kill them. Bad enough, until Freddy (Robert Englund) succeeds in killing Tina (Amanda Wyss) in her dream which results in her being dragged around her bedroom (and really around her bedroom, up the walls and across the ceiling) while her boyfriend Rod watches. Of course Rod doesn't have any good luck with this. He's just watched his girlfriend get sliced up by an invisible man while they were in a locked room. Rod soon gets carted off by the police, because he's the only one who could have done it, right? Ask Nancy (Heather Langenkamp) who has been having these same nightmares about a guy with a razor tipped glove. The very same type of cuts that appeared on Tina's hacked up body. Nancy suspects there is something more to this, and must fight to stay awake and alive.

Put like that, the plot is fairly basic, but what gives Elm Street its charm is that, as star Robert Englund says in "Never Sleep Again: The Elm Street Legacy" is that it is "a damn good story". It's such an original idea, and original ideas are where good, or entertaining films spring from.

The whole scary notion in Elm Street is that the only safe place is awake, and its impossible to remain in that safe place forever. It is inevitable that the kids in this film must end up in Freddy's stalking ground. It is this feeling of these kids not being in control that gives this film its tension, and makes the heroine's struggle against Freddy all the more heroic. Elm Street is a classic story of good triumphing over evil, and is the most creative, well planned and produced piece of art. The only problem is a tacked on ending allowing for the return of Freddy. Though, while this spoils the whole meaning of the climax, it does allow us 7 sequels, which is a good thing.

It's a classic. Five Darios, no doubt about that.

My Bloody Valentine (2009)

My Bloody Valentine (2009)

Director/Writer(s): Patrick Lussier (director), Todd Farmer (screenplay), Zane Smith (screenplay), John Beaird (1981 screenplay) and Stephen Miller (1981 story).

Cast: Jensen Ackles, Jaime King, Kerr Smith, Betsy Rue, Edi Gathegi, Tom Atkins, Kevin Tighe, Megan Boone, Karen Baum, Joy de la Paz...Genre: Crime Horror Mystery Thriller

Plot Outline: Tom returns to his hometown on the tenth anniversary of the Valentine's night massacre that claimed the lives of 22 people. Instead of a homecoming, however, Tom finds himself suspected of committing the murders, and it seems like his old flame is the only one will believes he's innocent.Certification: USA:R (for graphic brutal horror violence and grisly images throughout, some strong sexuality, graphic nudity and language.)

Size: 700 MB Megaupload: hxxp://www.megaupload.com/?d=SPZWKIRR

Well here we go. My first review on here for quite a while, and I choose a remake of one of the best 80's slashers around. The remade My Bloody Valentine.

A while back I saw and commented on the original My Bloody Valentine from the early 1980's. I am going to try and not compare the two as it always comes off worse for the remake, in most cases. (There are a couple of comparisons I will note after though).

So not comparing to the masterwork from the 80's, is this a good film? Yes it is, for a slasher film of this decade. While it is structured as a whodunnit, it is structured quite logically, and when the killer is revealed, it is believable and has a rational reason for the killing spree. Rational for a slasher fim at least. My Bloody Valentine was originally shot in 3D, and runs the risk of having some stupid looking shots when viewed in 2D. Friday the 13th Part 3 and Freddy's Dead:The Final Nightmare fall guilty of this. A pole or something shoved directly into camera so we can all marvel at 3D can look pretty stupid without the visual effect. The shots in My Bloody Valentine designed to give a shock 3D effect don't come off as too bad in 2D. (Obvious yes, but not out of place)

So what do you get when you view My Bloody Valentine? A good smattering of Blood, nudity, mystery, Blood, gratuitous violence and blood. This is a particularly bloody film with a few head meets pickaxe scenes. For those wanting no more than a gore fest, this is the film for you.

There is a downside though. For me at least, none of the cast, with the exception of Tom Atkins, appealed to me. It was a bit like, "sit through ten minutes of tedious acting until the next axe attack" . I know a lot of the films I enjoy have worse acting than My Bloody Valentine but they are still likable in some way. The cast of this film didn't do it for me. And that's a shame, because it is well constructed in other ways.

OK the comparison points. Harry Warden, the mad miner, in the original had that cool little origin of being driven mad after being trapped in a cave in in the mine for 6 days. Add a bit of cannibalism and there's a nice little origin for a villain. In the remake, Harry is a cold blooded killer for no real reason. However the rationale for the films killer is much much better in the remake than the original.

My Bloody Valentine is a hard one for me to classify. I am still not sure if I like it or not. I doubt I will watch it again any time soon, but it is well written and graphicly violent enough for a slasher, so I'll give it hmmmm. 3 and a half Darios, only let down from the acting.

Scream (1996)

Scream (1996)

Download link: hxxp://www.megaupload.com/?d=N9P693I6

Every once in a while, a horror film comes along that is well made and well designed, and uses the genre in a way not seen before. One such movie is Scream. Unfortunately the creation of a good film like this inspires countless clones and inevitable sequels which detract from the quality of the original.

Scream starts with a good idea, a killer is stalking people in a small town called Woodsboro, and dispatching them in horror movie fashion gory ways. Sounds like its been done before. But this killer is used in the film to satirise the whole field of horror movies, from the killer being a very obsessed student of horror films, (He corrects the first victims answer that Jason was the killer in Friday The 13th) through to the other characters acting as though they are characters in a horror film, which of course, they are.

A clever idea, although it does backfire on itself. All the primary characters, especially the rather annoying Randy, played by the equally annoying Jamie Kennedy, take the "rules" and conventions of a horror film as absolute gospel truth.

The good points of the film outweigh the negatives. It is a very well crafted whodunnit, with a logical, but unexpected reveal of who the killer is. It does satirise the genre well, (one of its aims), and caters for the expected quota of blood and shock scenes. It is also quite clever. The mask used by the killer is based upon a painting called "The Scream".

It is hard however to view Scream as a solo film. It is touted now as the the first chapter of the Scream Trilogy, a series that starts out good and rapidly declines in quality. Scream also was the inspiration for other "whodunnit" style slashers such as Urban Legend, I Know What You Did Last Summer, Valentine and other boring as hell films.

If only Scream was a solo film instead of a chapter in a trilogy (soon to be four films).

4 Darios

Halloween II (2009)

Halloween II (2009)

Download Links :

Part 1 : hxxp://www.megaupload.com/?d=IDMCHWIJ

Part 2: hxxp://www.megaupload.com/?d=5C2WBVV0

(1.3 GB split into 2 parts. Use VirtualDub to rejoin them)

I like Halloween. I like the series of Halloween movies. I even can tolerate Halloween :Resurrection (barely). I can see good points in Rob Zombie's reimagining of the concept in his Halloween (2007).

I, however, cannot bring myself to like this film. I can appreciate what Zombie is trying to do, in taking the mythos of Michael Myers in a different direction to the original series, but surely he could do it in a way that makes some sort of sense. Did you know that even though Myers' mother shot herself in the head last film she still hangs around Michael? Zombie does. Did you know that the appearance of her with a white horse is supposed to mean something? Zombie does, (or he is trying to be very Twin Peaks like). Did you know that you can get your victim out of an impossible situation by using the old Dallas trick of... it was only a dream? Zombie knows this quite well. In fact he uses that old, annoying and downright lazy trick more than once in this film.

This film is confusing as hell. Is Michael dead? Is he back stalking Laurie? Is Laurie mad, is she the only sane person? Is Michael even there for all the film? How the hell can his dead mother be around? How the hell can Laurie see her? And why is the white horse so important that it keeps cropping up?

The answers are......never revealed!

Damn lazy effort Rob Zombie.

One and a half Darios because of some cool death scenes.

Punisher : War Zone (2008)

Punisher : War Zone (2008)































Well I feel like I should go back and edit my comment in the review for the 2004 Punisher. Punisher War Zone, while it is tailored to the action loving audience, is not as bad as I had originally sensed. My comment was based upon only watching the first thirty-five or forty minutes, and has changed after I have seen the entire film.



I made a mistake in reviewing the Punisher films, and it was one made by many other people. I compared the 2004 Punisher and Punisher War Zone. War Zone is a completely different animal to the other film. Based on the Marvel Knights version of The Punisher, where Frank has been doing his thing for six years before the film even begins, War Zone throws us straight into a story of Frank vs a Crime Family, not slowing down to develop a revenge plot for Frank. While Thomas Jane's Punisher showed development of his reason and growing probability of his revenge on Howard Saint (Punisher 2004), War Zone pushes an even more simple point. It is this: Frank hates criminals, therefore, he kills them.



Not to say that Punisher:War Zone is a masterpiece, because it isn't, by a long shot. There is some terrible acting, especially by Dominic West, who plays the scarred-face villain Jigsaw (no relation to the killer in Saw), horrible cheesy lines by a lot of characters and a focus on action for the sake of it. (The "high on meth all the time" gang's acrobatic displays, and Ray Stevenson (The Punisher) being able to kill people from a variety of positions. Look at me, I can kill heaps of people while hanging upsidedown from a spinning chandelier. Well OK. good for you. Looks great, but I don't see The Punisher (as a character) ever really doing that.
)


Punisher : War Zone is good fun, if you want a graphic action film. Sit back, switch the brain down for an hour and a half and enjoy.


Three Darios













(And before anyone asks, yes I am going to review the original Punisher film from 1989, starring Dolph Lundgren)

The Punisher (2004)

The Punisher (2004)

The Punisher. For those who are not familiar with the character, the backstory is quite simple. Frank Castle, Vietnam veteran, stumbles across a mob execution in a central park, (where all mob hits happen apparantly) with his family. In the crossfire, Castle's wife and kids are brutally killed. Feeling that he has lost everything, Frank (with a nice looking death's head shirt) declares war on all crime, and decides that he will punish criminals for what he has lost. He becomes "The Punisher"

Thats the character from Marvel comics. Pretty simple backstory, but a ton of story potential. The Punisher cropped up on animated series (Spider-Man:The Animated Series) with only minimal tweaking to his personality, and starred (portrayed by Dolph Lundgren), in a movie in 1989, called ...err..., The Punisher. Both these portrayals were fairly similar to the original Marvel comic character.

The Punisher (2004) gives the Punisher a good stretch of time in giving him his origin. Because he's fairly young in this film, mid thirties maybe, the Vietnam aspect is removed and replaced by Castle (Thomas Jane) being a FBI agent. In the course of a sting operation, the son of evil businessman Howard Saint (John Travolta) is killed. Saint doen't appreciate this, and at the urging of his wife, has an attack on Castle, and his family planned. Castle's entire family is killed. Not just wife and children, but his Mother, Father, various Aunts, Uncles, Cousins, Nieces, Nephews, and anyone else around at the time is killed. Of course Frank survives and takes up his revenge upon Saint and his family. (And with a nice point, he does so only when the official system has failed. He gives law and justice time to do the work for him. Only when he sees there will be no justice from the system, after five months, does he pursue what he calls, "natural justice")

I know an awful lot of people who do not like this movie. A lot of them are disappointed that Frank doesn't just pick up a gun and go a blazing away. Instead he is smart, playing off members of the Saint family and organisation against themselves so they do all the fighting. In fact, for a movie called The Punisher, there is a lack of intense gunplay scenes. There are only two extended battle scenes, the first is the killing of Castle's family, and the second is the final attack on Saint. Various other scenes crop up but are not dwelt on as much. There is one other fight scene worth mentioning, and that is the fight between Castle and the assassin called "The Russian" played by WWE Wrestler Kevin "Diesel" Nash.

Castle, in a great move by director Jonathon Hensleigh, spends the movie punishing the Saints, not just executing them. It is remarkable that an action movie, and a comic based action movie at that, has that much thought put into its construction.

The Punisher, is a very faithfull adaptation of the character of Castle, and while it did alienate the action-loving audience who don't care to dig deeper into this movie, it has hidden depths, and is well deserving of the four Darios I am awarding it. It has two other positives. The score is great and the original song by Mark Collie "In Time" is brilliant.

Unfortunately, The Punisher was "rebooted" in 2008 with Punisher:War Zone, which was designed precisely to appeal to the action crowd.

Four Darios

Official Trailer (From Youtube) :