The original "Batman" series of the 1960's is many things to may people, it is not, however, good, but it was fun. The series was a total carbon-copy of the comic books at the time, filled with colorful sets and equally colorful villains who wanted nothing more than to hurt Batman and Robin and rule Gotham...they would never really get past the 'exposing their plan diatribe' because shortly after the caped crusaders would foil their plans. The series was produced with the same tone of the comics and even added flare with words such as "POW", "THWACK" and "SLPOOSH" among others, appear on screen when villains are punched or kicked by the duo. It was for all intents and purposes a live action comic book, the lines were cheesy, the costumes looked silly, the acting was amateur and the whole thing had 'camp' written all over it. It was also aimed entirely for children. Before the time of adult comics (especially Frank Miller's seminal masterpiece "The Dark Knight Returns" published 20 years after this film), this was kid's stuff. And every kid (around the world) got on board the Batmobile for a thrilling adventure. The show was an incredible success and made stars out of leads Adam West and Burt Ward. By the mid 1960's "Batman" was everywhere from action figures, to lunch boxes, to pajamas, to cake toppers. You name it and it probably had a "Batman" licensed product available on the market. At the height of the series (between the first and second seasons) Fox d...

Talking about a movie idea the two directors have, one of the participants in the audio commentary says, 'Actual movie not guaranteed.' That pretty much sums up the entire film. Where do I start with this mess? This review comes in pretty late in the release of the disc, and so there's nothing I can add to what's been said; I can only pile on more words to the heap of negative reviews this movie has received. The movie, to my knowledge, has only had one good review, and even then it wasn't very glowing. These reviews, however, have not stopped people from going to see this movie, as it has grossed over $80 million worldwide, thereby assuring writers/directors Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer another cinematic catastrophe. With no near end in sight, it is with a heavy heart that I will try to help them try to make a better movie. These are tips they can follow to, let's say, suck less. Tip 1: when you have to point out the reference ('Ah, the Transformer cube', identifying Dane Cook by name), it's not funny. Not only that, it also underestimates the intelligence of your audience. When you have to explain why the joke is funny, you seem to acknowledge most people don't get it, and try to justify the gag. That just makes the joke seem that much more pathetic and makes everybody wonder why you're even saying anything. You end up looking like an idiot (an unfunny idiot, no less). Tip 2: merely repeating references (the baby Shrek vomit, the 'Ho...

When I first got “American Gangster: The Complete Second Season” (2007) in the mail, I was scared. If didn’t like the 2007 movie “American Gangster,” even though I really like Denzel Washington, how am I going to deal with the BET TV series that’s piggybacking off of the title? I quickly learned that not only did I like the series better than the movie that it shares a name with, but the first season actually premiered in November 2006, a full year before the film. “American Gangster: The Complete Second Season” is an well-constructed, in-depth documentary series about many famous African American drug lords, gang leaders and criminals. Each episode focuses in on a specific person or group, even going so far as to interview famous African American gangsters and drug lords like Frank Lucas, the basis for the 2007 film, and Melvin Williams, whose exploits inspired the HBO series “The Wire” (2002). At first blush, I think the series is a little falsely marketed with the subtitle “True Crimes. Real Consequences.” on the cover of the DVD. The series isn’t so much about the criminal justice system; it’s about delving into the culture and moments of time in which these men existed. Through interviews with family members, related persons, and the men themselves, “American Gangster” delves into what drew these men into this lifestyle. I understand that the emphasis on consequences on the cover is to try and avoid the image t...

LWT’s (now ITV London) long-running series An Audience With… began in 1978 with An Audience With Jasper Carrott. The format of the show has remained consistent throughout the last thirty years: a comedian, musician or raconteur is invited to ‘do their thing’ and field questions in front of a live audience of recognisable faces from the worlds of film, television and music. The show has run the gamut from the superb to the downright bizarre, featuring shows revolving around figures as diverse as Peter Ustinov (in 1988), the children’s puppet Sooty (in 1996) and Diana Ross (1999); there have also been occasions in which actors or comedians have performed as their most well-known characters, including 1997’s An Audience With Alf Garnett, in which Warren Mitchell gave a live performance as Alf Garnett, the character he played in the sitcoms In Sickness and In Health (1985-1992) and Till Death Us Do Part (1965-1975). This 1981 recording entitled An Audience With Dudley Moore was the third instalment in the series. It features the always likeable Dudley Moore performing music and comedy in front of a live audience of recognisable faces from the world ...

This adaptation of Henrik Ibsen’s classic play was adapted for the television by the British playwright John Osborne. Premiering in Germany in 1891 to largely unfavourable reviews, Ibsen’s play Hedda Gabler is often taken as tapping into the same cultural wellspring from which Freudian psychoanalysis developed, and there have been many psychoanalytic approaches taken towards the play that are based around the complexity and ambiguity surrounding the various characters’ motives: the play seems to suggest that people’s motives are not always rational and can often be driven by the subconscious—people may suggest that they aim to do one thing but their actions lead them in an entirely different direction. Other people have interpreted the play as a critique of the growing bourgeoisie in Europe during the late 19th Century. The play begins following the marriage of the aristocratic Hedda Gabler (Diana Rigg) and the bourgeois academic George Tesman (Denis Lill). Hedda’s boredom with her marriage and with Tesman become immediately apparent as, upon entering the scene, she bickers quite coldly with her husband and Aunt Juliana. (Significantly, the play conveys Hedda’s boredom with her marriage through its title, retaining Hedda’s maiden name.) Tesman is a simple man, pleased when Aunt Juliana (Kathleen Byron) returns his old slippers...

The late 1960's and early 1970's was a volatile time in America, the country was fighting an unpopular war (Vietnam), the economy wasn't the best, it's political figures were being mocked and images of the war were shocking people on a daily basis (wow sounds familiar right?). Usually the film industry follows trends, and releases pictures that can relate to the youth, the same youth that were 'smoking drugs' and protesting, the same youth that were experimenting in sex (the sexual revolution), with movies like "Easy Rider" (1969) which broke ground. So what was a movie like "Patton" doing being released during this time? "Patton" was a patriotic film about a gung-ho General. If Fox was anything like it is today, this could have been seen as Hollywood's way of influencing people into being patriotic despite the events that are happening, to push an agenda. Maybe that was the point, or maybe the producers just wanted to make a great film about one of American history's most famous military leaders. I'd like to think it was the latter. I am surprised that the film was as popular as it was, considering the climate it was released in. I wonder how many 'kids' went to see it theatrically upon original release or whether the audiences were predominantly older people? "Patton" tells the story of General George S. Patton Jr. (George C. Scott), a salty mouthed, hard fighting and opinionated General that led the U.S. forces in North Africa and into Europe. His big mouth often got him into trouble and his attitude ...

This is a Canadian television production of "Journey to the Center of the Earth", and is not to be confused with the 1959 classic, nor with the big-budget IMAX remake coming this summer (or any of the other dozen or so productions of the story that have popped up over the years). In this attempt at the Jules Verne fantasy classic, Rick Schroeder plays Jonathan Brock, a scientist who engages in bare-knuckle fights for fun and cash. A Mrs. Dennison (Victoria Pratt) hires him to find her husband Edward, who disappeared into a Russian mine in Alaska four years earlier. With his nephew Abel (Steven Grayhm) along to chronicle the trip, the trio takes off for Alaska, where they meet a Russian tough guy named Sergei (Mike Dopud) who joins their expedition (his brother disappeared with Mrs. Dennison's husband). As soon as they party leaves their camp, Brock becomes a bit of a blathering wimp, and Sergei takes the tough guy role, as Jonathan's life as a brawler is forgotten. It takes more than a third of the movie's running time to get to the mine. Along the way, there is a long and gratuitous foot chase, an attack by a bear that we never see, and a bit of smoke and mirrors (literally) used to find the secret mine shaft entrance. The mine - of course - leads deep into the Earth, and while exploring the fantastic and wholly unlikely l...

Martin Lawrence plays "doctor" R.J. Stevens (nee Roscoe Jenkins), a successful television talk show host, a cross between Oprah Winfrey, Doctor Phil, and Jerry Springer. For the occasion of a family reunion, his family talks him into returning to the small Georgia town where he grew up. With his actress girlfriend (and "Survivor" (2000-Present) champion) Bianca (Joy Bryant) and his son Jamal (Damani Roberts; and no word on where mom is) in tow, he heads home. Upon arrival, the usual predictable situations occur as Roscoe Jenkins and prissy Bianca have difficulty fitting into country life after spending so much time in Los Angeles. Naturally, Bianca fails to ingratiate herself to Roscoe's extended family, and Roscoe eventually comes to realize the shallow and plastic way of the Los Angeles celebrity are not for him after all. Lucinda (Nicole Ari Parker), the girl that Roscoe had failed to romance as young man, is still lurking around. Of course she is a pure hearted and kind country girl who shows Roscoe the error of his ways and brings him back down to Earth. Before this happens, we must first witness endless cattiness between Bianca and Lucinda, while Lucinda's significant other (Roscoe's car salesman cousin Clyde, played by

Despite the film, this has been the hardest film I've ever had to review. The reasoning behind this is that I am well and truly torn between slamming the film for it's brutal and harsh depiction of what appears to be (on the surface anyway) senseless violence, or cheering at the top of my lungs for the intense violence. It's a fine line. When I originally saw the film in theaters I was cheering and excited to see the classic cinematic icon return to the screen and kill some bad guys. I was certainly swept 'in the moment', I was with like-minded friends and the 'pack' mentality kicked right in and I was savoring the violence. I didn't care that the filmmaker's tried (thinly, I might add) to make some sort of comment on the tragedies that occur in Burma (or as it's called today, Myanmar), it was all about the action. No matter how many times the filmmaker's shove it down our throats in interviews, commentaries or whatever...the only two reasons anyone would really want to see this film (this includes myself) is for the return of Rambo and the action/violence. But I guess the filmmakers needed to feel a little better about themselves to justify the gruesome violence. The second time I watched this film (for this review) a different feeling surged through me, and it was the opposite of my original theatrical viewing, I was disgusted at the level of brutality in the film and I was offended that the filmmakers exploited the use of Burma's plight to churn out senseless entertainment. And it's this second viewing that had made this review so difficult to write. Because...

After Freddy Highmore’s performance in “Finding Neverland” (2004) he was praised by critics for his acting talent at such a young age and became a child star, but one of the great dangers for a star at any age is over exposure, a bad territory that Highmore finds himself coming closer to by playing both Jared and Simon Grace in “The Spiderwick Chronicles” (2008). Jared and Simon’s mother Helen (Mary-Louise Parker) recently decided to move in to an old relative’s estate after her divorce, taking her daughter Mallory (Sarah Bolger) and two sons with her. Jared is apparently very upset with the move and has a history of acting out, but when pokes holes in the kitchen wall after he hears a noise in the walls he discovers an old dumbwaiter that leads to a hidden room that contains the Field Manual made by Arthur Spiderwick (David Strathairn) that reveals a magical world all around his old home. There’s a lot of mythology like any other fantasy movie, but “The Spiderwick Chronicles” has an annoying tendency to favor exposition over discovery, with characters making odd long declarations of what they are and their tendencies or special abilities. These magical creatures are all digital; continuing the sad trend away from puppeteering and practical effects, to movies that like to throw in computer-animated characters with celebrity voices, and here again “Spiderwick” is no exception. ...

In the recent interview (from “Cinematical”-site, conducted by Eric Kohn), Indian born-American raised director/writer/co-producer/actor M. Night Shyamalan says; “The only things that have ever hurt my movies is their expectations. There's nothing I can do about that”. This seems to be also true with his latest film “The Happening (2008)”, which quickly started the usual “I-hate-the-movie vs. I-like-the-movie”-debate on various forums. People often have established a particular mindset towards certain movies, even before the actual feature, but with Shyamalan, you never know what he’ll actually deliver. He plays mainly by his own rules, even with the big studio system. Because of that, Shyamalan rarely receives any universal “praising”, nor “mocking”. It’s always both. He’s not a typical “blockbuster man”, so people equally either “love” or “hate” his movies…with passion. Whatever the case may be, people also pay to see his movies. After breaking through with “The Sixth Sense (1999)” (Oscar nominations for “Best Director” and “Best Writing (Screenplay Written Directly for the Screen)”), Shyamalan has been one of the more interesting players in Hollywood. Bold “Unbreakable (2000)” failed to impress at the box office, but “Signs (2002)” was another big hit (and the last real “hit” he’s had so far, I might add). It was one of the highest grossing films of 2002 and earned over $400 million worldwide. The subject matter was very promising from the start; Alien invasion through the eyes of a close family. And of course, as it’s ...

Judd Apatow is building an empire, producing and sometimes writing/directing, comedies that seem to be coming out with every major movie season. Though the movies with his name somewhere on them have been hit or miss for me, “Drillbit Taylor” (2008), the latest part in the Apatow comedy takeover is the first to hit in the middle. The initial plot is almost “Superbad” (2007): The Freshman Years. Tall lanky and awkward Wade (Nate Hartley) is best friends with shorter, fatter, but more loudmouthed Ryan (Troy Gentile). Ryan and Wade are about to start high school, but on the first day they wind up being bullied after Wade tells some bullies to stop hassling gangly super-nerd McLovin Emmett (David Dorfman). This of course, along with some bad wardrobe choices, gets them into a cycle of bullying that they can’t escape. The logical step for these rich teenage suburbanites is to hire a bodyguard Owen Wilson (Drillbit Taylor). I mean Drillbit Taylor (Owen Wilson). Beyond the basic setup, it doesn’t stick to the “Superbad” formula, but does follow something Judd Apatow produced comedies tend to do: try to make you bond to the characters, pull some heartstrings and wind up with a (spoiler alert) happy ending. Unfortunately, it doesn’t have the same success as the characters aren...

Sometimes a sequel needs time to cook, a little bit of time to not look too rushed, but keep with the popularity. One of Disney’s latest sequels “The Jungle Book 2” (2003) turns out to be a bit overdone in the 36 years since the release of the original “The Jungle Book” in 1967. The story picks up a short while after the first left off, with Mowgli (Haley Joel Osment) living and trying to adjust to living life in the Indian village that he followed Shanti (Mae Whitman) to after leaving the jungle. However even though John Rhys-Davies’ character has adopted him, who is oddly credited only as Rahjan’s Father, he feels a strong urge to return to the jungle. Baloo (John Goodman) misses Mowgli and resolves to visit him, but unfortunately Shere Kahn (Tony Jay) is back and looking to get revenge. Style-wise, it’s a Disney movie through and through, but lacks much of the magic that would be required by Disney animation. I have my reservations about the original "Jungle Book", but I admire the animation, something Disney made its name off of. Unfortunately, “The Jungle Book 2” falls in to the too common Disney trap in its poorly blended computer generated elements that sometimes pop out from the background, such as the 3-D rendered water when the 2-D animated Baloo emerges from the river that draw me out of the movie and feel unnecessa...

When I got home from work and found the UPS envelop waiting for me, I knew that I had another review to work on. So, I tore open the envelope and found this title up for review. I saw that it was another Maneater Series title from Genius Entertainment and then looked at the rest of the cover. So far it has appeal and perhaps the promise of a good story. So, the question that is to be answered here is...will it BE a good story? Read on and you will find out. “Hybrid” (1:30:03) – Synopsis: When a partially blind man receives the eyes of a wolf in the first human cross-species transplant, his eyesight grows better than ever. Unfortunately, he also starts seeing other humans as prey. Ordered to be hunted down and destroyed, he seeks shelter with a pack of ferocious companions and a sultry woman who has driving animal instincts of her own. The only positive that I have about this movie is the idea that Lydia Armstrong (Tinsel Korey) is able to help Aaron Scates (Cory Monteith) deal with the changes that he is undergoing. The presence of a patient, gentle teacher is always helpful when the afflicted is having issues adapting to becoming a monster. The downsides? I’m trying to follow the story and understand where the visions of other wolves come into play. I also have a hard time following how Aaron was able to become more wolf-like by just eye implants alone. Okay, I know that the wolves presented are sacred to the Native Americans in this story, but still...now, if it w...

When it comes to the three principal cast members of the title in review, I’m no stranger to them. Let’s start with Peter Facinelli, first. The very first time I encountered him in “Can’t Hardly Wait” (1998). People have said he looks like a younger-looking version of Tom Cruise. Still, he was Mike Dexter, a high school bully who kept making life hell for many people. After that, he moved on onto other roles. Facinelli would appear in an independent film called “The Big Kahuna” (1999) alongside Kevin Spacey and Danny DeVito. Once I saw this movie, It was apparent that Facinelli could act. In 2000, I had seen him in “Supernova”. I didn’t really care for this movie, but I never forgot Peter Facinelli. Then I came to find that he was doing a TV series that was to air on FOX, which is the one up for review. This wasn’t a series that I decided to take an interest in originally. I guess it was because I was moving into my ‘I don’t watch TV’ phase. When it comes to Bill Bellamy, I’ve only seen him in one movie, which was “Love Stinks” (1999) where he was alongside French Stewart as his best friend. Finally, we get to Tiffani Thiessen. Who could forget seeing her in the later years of “Beverly Hills, 9021...

The funniest thing in this entire movie is listening to Peter Stomarre attempting to speak (and managing to mangle) a British accent. Protection of the witless should definitely be a requisite after watching this movie. After seeing this and 'Meet the Spartans' in the same week, in the best Homer Simpson style, I'm about to go punch my television until it becomes more funny. The movie stars Larry the Cable Guy as a sherif's deputy, who kidnaps a blonde (Ivana Milicevic) from the FBI agents (Yaphet Kotto and others) that are protecting her. See, the thing is that he thinks they're trying to kidnap her, and he wants to save her. He dreams of becoming an FBI agent and he thinks this is his chance to snuggle up to the bureau. After about 26 minutes of this I wanted to beat my television until it became more funny. Larry is stupid, bigoted, racist and ignorant, and usually characters like this get to change to become a bit more tolerant, but in this movie the characters that populate it alter to flex to him. Whether he turns out to be right not is actually beside the point; his stubbornness and unwillingness to change shouldn't be rewarded in the first place. This movie has a lot of racist jabs, pop culture reference jokes and tons of fart jokes. His misuse of words is simple and nothing he says is funny at all. With quips like 'My hand hasn't been this sore since t...

“My God…is this guy really that good or do we just really suck?” "Shoot 'Em Up" is a film which people usually have strong opinions one way or the other on. On one hand it can be seen as a self-conscious satire of the John Woo style actioners, taking the precedent set by the "Transporter" films (2002-2008) a few steps further. On the other it can come across as too far in that direction, with the people involved screaming at everyone about how funny they are. It even strikes me that, depending on your mood when you see it, you could have different interpretations again. Now me, while the film does glide at times past its agreed set-up of ridiculous action into a whole new realm of nonsense, I find it a thrill ride that brings adrenaline and fun back to this genre. "xXx" (2002) tried such things with Vin Diesel operating some machinery or his car or something (I fell asleep) but this is the real deal here folks...Unless you think severing an umbilical cord with a bullet might not be your cup of tea. Clive Owen is a man we only know as Smith. He’s just hanging around bus stops when a baby-sized problem gets dropped in his lap. And this baby appears to have two different groups chasing after it, one attempting to kill it and the other apparently trying to save it. Paul Giamatti (who is always such a pleasure to watch in anything even "Lady in the Water" (2006), which had n...

Whenever I see a Will Ferrell-movie trailer, it usually says nothing to me. I rather find him silly and immature, but when I saw the trailer for 'Semi-Pro', I was inexplicably interested. The long and short of the movie is that this is an underdog sports movie with Will Ferrell. It's silly and rather immature, but I ended up enjoying it. Will Ferrell has this anything-for-a-laugh sense of humour, which occasionally results in some funny absurdist humour. The perfect example of this happens about halfway through the movie. After his pep talk, introducing new acquisition Monix (Woody Harrelson), he talks about a possum for reasons that I cannot even begin to imagine. By the same token, at one point in the movie, the entire team finds itself wearing bright, ridiculous-looking costumes of palm trees, prawns and suns. They're practicing for a half-time show, and the scene is an important one. Though the costumes (and Mr. Ferrell's acting) undercut the entire scene, it's something that fits in perfectly with the tone of the movie. For me, these types of non-sequitors get more laughs than any wanted setup. The movie follows the typical underdog sports movie, and there's honestly a bigger moral in 'The Mighty Ducks' than in here, but 'Semi-Pro' follows the conventions with precise timing. The obstacles come at the right time, and the winning streaks come at the right time. It's nothing special, and the only difference between this and a half-dozen other u...

I’ll admit, when I had first heard of “Army Wives” (2007-Current), I often wondered if this was some different series that was to be along the same lines as “Desperate Housewives” (2004-Current), just based in the Army. However, this was just a thought since I’ve never actually seen an episode. Then I got the package in the mail knowing that my next reviews were inside. That’s one of the fun things about getting those mysterious envelopes. You always know that there’s gonna be some secrets waiting to come out once they’re opened. In this case, I found that one of my three titles in THIS package was the first season of “Army Wives”. I guess I would have my chance to find out of this was a sister show to “Desperate Housewives”. I can definitely say that’s a big, fat NO!! The only thing that I’m sure these two shows have in common is that they are both released by Buena Vista. Okay, now that I think about it, I HAVE caught little bits and pieces of “Desperate Housewives” and these two shows are definitely down different paths. Also, I noticed the Lifetime network’s logo on the back of the cover, so that was also a tip-off. Lifetime, for those of you who aren’t up to speed, is a cable/satellite TV network that has programming tailored more for women. As I would find out, “Army Wives” is no exception and it definitely falls in the Lifetime category. But the question to answer here is: Is this DVD box of “Army Wives: The Complete First Season” worth being in either the must-see category or the must-own category? Read on and find out. “Army Wives: The Complete First Season” –...

Too many horror movies are misusing or abusing the classic shocker formula for horror movies. Getting a jump out of the audience isn’t just about having something jump at them first; the most memorable scary moments are built up by anticipation, the feeling of dread built through pacing and establishing tone. Won Shin-Yeon’s “The Wig” (2005) loses out on the tension that could be built and instead favors shock moments without any tension throughout and a sloppy plot twist. The story follows Su-hyeon (Chae Min-seo), a surviving cancer patient who has been undergoing chemotherapy and is finally able to leave the hospital. Her sister Ji-hyeon (Yu Seon), who lost her voice in a car accident many years ago, gives Su-hyeon a wig to make her feel better about herself in public. Unbeknownst to either sister is the wig’s murderous intent and creation history. Though the wig makes Su-hyeon feel better at first, it eventually overtakes her life and starts shaping her in the image of the person who the hair originally belonged to in order to fill the hair’s original owner’s desires. I understand that there needs to be mystery behind the owner of the wig and the wig’s creation that builds, especially if Shin-Yeon is trying to set up a big twist at the end of the movie, but the clues just aren’t around until 10 minutes before the twist occurs. For the most part there’s a lot of convoluted references and bizarre lines of dialogue, but ...

"30 Days of Night" is an adequate horror film, although enjoyment does require a willingness to absorb oneself in the subject matter. Where comparable films like "28 Days Later" (2002) draw viewers in, "30 Days of Night" suffers somewhat from a lack of focus on film fundamentals in search of atmosphere and style. The results are admirable but lack the sympathy and passion we need to fully engage. The premise of "30 Days of Night" (based on the graphic novel of the same name) is that vampires – not elegant and sophisticated people, but bestial, wild creatures that are almost reptilian in character – finally realise that towns near the Arctic Circle have extended periods during which the sun does not rise. Taking advantage of this fact with the help of the Stranger, a human who wants the vampires to “turn” him (Ben Foster, in one of the film’s few good performances), the vampires arrive in Barrow to wreak havoc on its residents, including local sheriff Eben (Josh Hartnett) and his estranged wife Stella (Melissa George). The havoc they end up wreaking is impressive, real stuff of terror, but fades fairly quickly – the town is beset by the undead and totally unprepared, so there’s a giant slaughter that simply runs out. A few set pieces continue the good work, like the one involving bait, but all of a sudden the cast is cut down, and the film is left with a small group of survivors. Normally this isn’t a problem, but...

Influenced by Peter Jackson’s earlier (and superior) films such as "Bad Taste" (1987), "Meet the Feebles" (1989) and "Braindead", it’s a film with such a ridiculously obvious premise it’s surprising it wasn’t made sooner. Taking a fistful of (self aware) horror clichés, gallons of fake blood and a tonne of old school latex intestines and organs, they don’t spare on the Troma-moments. I guess when you have WETA Workshop at your disposal you put ‘em to good use. It had even a hardened gore fan like myself was wincing away. Gist: Youngest son Henry (Nathan Meister) inflicted with "ovinophobia" a fear of sheep stemming from a childhood trauma, returns to the farm he left as a young man to find his older brother Angus (Peter Feeney) has turned the farm into a testing ground for genetically engineered sheep, the extent of which even Angus is unaware of due to the involvement of disgraced scientist Dr. Rush (Tandi Wright). A pair of bumbling environmental activists unleash one of the specimens onto an unsuspecting flock, who in turn infect each other and attack a group of farmers and investors who are there for Angus’ super-sheep display. All the classic horror set ups are there. Isolated location, genetic tinkering, unsuspecting humans...The beauty of this film is that it takes from many sub-genres. The sheep themselves are classic zombie material, the human/sheep h...

"30 Days of Night" is an adequate horror film, although enjoyment does require a willingness to absorb oneself in the subject matter. Where comparable films like "28 Days Later" (2002) draw viewers in, "30 Days of Night" suffers somewhat from a lack of focus on film fundamentals in search of atmosphere and style. The results are admirable but lack the sympathy and passion we need to fully engage. The premise of "30 Days of Night" (based on the graphic novel of the same name) is that vampires – not elegant and sophisticated people, but bestial, wild creatures that are almost reptilian in character – finally realise that towns near the Arctic Circle have extended periods during which the sun does not rise. Taking advantage of this fact with the help of the Stranger, a human who wants the vampires to “turn” him (Ben Foster, in one of the film’s few good performances), the vampires arrive in Barrow to wreak havoc on its residents, including local sheriff Eben (Josh Hartnett) and his estranged wife Stella (Melissa George). The havoc they end up wreaking is impressive, real stuff of terror, but fades fairly quickly – the town is beset by the undead and totally unprepared, so there’s a giant slaughter that simply runs out. A few set pieces continue the good work, like the one involving bait, but all of a sudden the cast is cut down, and the film is left with a small group of survivors. Normally this isn’t a problem, but...

Drew Hastings has been around since the early 1990s. He distinguished himself by having a very direct, no-nonesense style of telling jokes, and this show is apparently typical of his humour. He tells stories that bring up interesting images, but they're always funny. He's a regular on the Bob & Ted Radio Show, and has had a few one-man shows. With 'Irked and Miffed', he's made his way to stand-up comedy special. The bespectacled comic talks about fashion ('These are my Al Sharpton frames, of course; big, black and you can see right through them'), about relationships ('I'm a Pisces, she's a barbed fish hook, in the corner of my mouth'), fitness ('I gotta quit smoking. I get winded playing euchre'), dating someone 20 years younger than he is (contrary to what his friends think, it's not great, it just 'means you got to put up with the same b******* you were putting up with 20 years ago'), and, of course, farming ('Did you know that at night, a possum walking through a cornfield sounds exactly like three men with an axe?'). He has some very insightful things to say, though many of some hilarious observations (one comparing something to a coffee cup while driving) can't be written down here thanks to the language used. Indeed, his words and stories aren't for your kids, but you'll certainly love the guy. His stories on aging and Viagra and drugs are very entertaining. He weaves in and out of topics very smoothly and gracefully. He offers some actual insights, as he talks about love ('I tried...

It’s an understatement to say that I was greatly anticipating watching "George A. Romero’s Diary of the Dead. The original "Living Dead" trilogy (1968-1985) is amongst my favourite horror films. The follow up "Land of the Dead" (2005) was a worthy successor as well. So when the announcement was made of a brand new take on his zombie lore, but using the now all-too-familiar ‘handicam style for added realism’, I was very excited. I talked with fanboy abandon all day about the fact I was going to watch it...sucks to be me. What an absolute mess this was and for so many reasons. I was bored stiff (cadaver *humour*) almost the entire way through and ended up along way away from being satisfied once it was done. First up was the “acting” or whatever it was that they called that. Listen, I do happen to know a thing or two about the craft. And something that is talked about in every workshop about it is that there is a vast difference between merely saying your lines and between actually delivering them. It’s about the suspension of disbelief that allows us to be put into the shoes of the characters involved. What a joke that this was here. I’ve heard better delivery at a cold reading (audition without prior knowledge of the script) and it was embarrassing to watch these people fumble around saying everything in a shallow monotone. And I do mean everything. A fun trick is to jump to any scene in the film while someone is talking and realise that they sound exactly the same whether discussing philosophy, the state of filmmaking...

Comedy Central has created a drug themed double-dip release for the shows they produced, and a couple they cancelled, aptly titled “Comedy Central’s Home Grown.” This single disc collection features five episodes of a few of Comedy Central’s better known shows, called 'Buds' on the disc, a collection of sketches from other shows that Comedy Central owns, dubbed 'Stems' on the disc, and a handful of shorts that have nothing to do with Comedy Central shows, called 'Seeds' on the disc. The constant drug references in the menus and even the blurbs on the disc get a little annoying, for the most part simply because of the over use of quotation marks. The designers of the disc are trying far too hard to be funny. The fact that this is simply a slapped together with drug references and a handful of episodes without any special features, it just feels like an advertisement that they’re trying to trick people into paying for. Overall I’m a little insulted by this disc trying to be clever or funny, and it just turns into a big cash scheme. While some of the material is worth watching, you’re better off watching the same material on Comedy Central’s website, rather than this essentially featureless disc as it doesn’t have any bonus features to it. Either that or just go ahead and check out the actual season sets of the TV shows instead rather than wasting time with this disc. The “Strangers with Candy” (1999-2000) episode is great, but I’m tired of “Reno 911!” (2003-Present) and “The Root of All Evil” (2008) isn’t worth w...

I can honestly say that when it comes to “Home Improvement” (1991-1999) that I’m no stranger to it. I managed to watch a few select episodes. I can honestly say that what few episodes that I did see...I really didn’t like “Home Improvement”. Tim Allen was one of the main reasons I came to dislike the series. I can’t say that I dislike him as an actor. I did like him in the first two “The Santa Clause” movies (1994 & 2002). So, at least he can play a lovable Santa Clause. I also enjoyed his character in “Galaxy Quest” (1999). I guess it’s just his character in this series itself. This series also made Jonathan Taylor Thomas known during the 90's. I don’t hear so much when it comes to him anymore. Still, such is the fate of actors such as he. I guess it makes me wonder where the chemistry got mixed up for a series like this. In any case, let's see how this final season of this series stacks up. “Home Improvement: The Complete Eighth Season” – After eight unforgettable years of sidesplitting laughs, heartwarming family moments and the never-ending quest for “More Power”, one of the most popular shows in the history of television bids a final farewell. Relive some of the Taylors’ most memorable episodes in “Home Improvement’s” remarkable eighth (and final) season. Randy and Brad set off on their own paths, Tim quits his job at ‘Tool Time’ and the family makes the ultimate decision to move from their beloved home. One of the things I liked about the series is the character...

War classics a favorite of this reviewer, from films that glorify war like "Patton" (1970) to those that show the horror of it like "Platoon" (1986). World War II has seen it's fair share of epics covering major battles and key figures of history, the majority of which are patriotic films that display bravery and show the German's as the ultimate villain (not exactly difficult), I'm sure when these types of films screened originally in theaters audiences must have applauded or cheered every time a German was killed, shot down or exterminated. "Battle of Britain" is another in a line of British produced war films made on a large scale with an ensemble cast of heavy-hitters. The film doesn't wave the flag too much, as it covers both sides of the battle and puts a face on the Germans (not exactly a 'human' face but they are represented in this film). "Battle of Britain" basically covers the country's defense of it's airspace during those perilous times in 1940 when Germany's Luftwaffe crossed into England and started heavy bombing of their air fields and eventually leading up to the bombing of London. The film tells the story of these events from different angles, including the RAF pilots and their commanders, from various points of Government (on both sides) and also from the German side as well. What this means however, is that there is a lot to cover in the film's 132 minutes and also a lot of characters to keep track of. The film includes appearances by Michael Caine,

similar in style to "Battle of Britain" but much more engaging this British war epic was probably a decade too late. The film banked on a cavalcade of stars to draw cinema punters, added to the heroic (but ultimately unsuccessful operation) subject matter it should have been a bigger film than it was, however, it was released in an era when audiences were leaning away from studio epics and towards a new type of film, the summer blockbuster. A tradition started with "Jaws" (1975) and in 1977 saw the release and box office domination of "Star Wars", films like "A Bridge Too Far" seemed too archaic. "A Bridge Too Far" tells the story of the allied offensive 'Operation Market Garden' which took place in the Netherlands, the operation's goal was to break through the heavily defended enemy lines and to take control of key bridges, the operation was unsuccessful and cost the Allied forces in heavy losses. Much like "Battle of Britain" this film also covers these events from various points of view, including the America, British and Nazi. The result is yet another all-star cast of ensemble players that include 7 Oscar winning actors, the list of high-profile cast includes Dirk Bogarde,James Caan, Michael Caine, Sean Connery, Denholm Elliott, Elliott Gould,

In 1999 director Robert Sarkies released his first feature film, “Scarfies” it would hardly set the international film community afire, but it did impact in New Zealand. The film is a dark comedy of sorts that deals with students, drugs and the return of a dangerous character who wants his drugs back. The film’s tone and style was distinctly ‘New Zealand’ and paid homage to the film’s location, Dunedin and the student culture that thrives there. Nine years later Sarkies returns with his second feature, and “Out of the Blue” couldn’t be a more different film. Dealing with real life events that shook a small South Island town and shocked a nation the day after the gruesome massacre. In November 1990, an unemployed gun collector, David Gray went on a shooting spree that lasted most of the day, well into the night and ended the following day by his being shot down by police. Gray had taken the lives of 13 people; men, women and children. This act of insanity is considered a black spot in New Zealand history. In a country that’s considered a slice of paradise it’s inconceivable that such an event could occur. New Zealand does not have a prominent and ubiquitous gun culture (outside of farms anyway); the most you’ll ever see is a rifle (at best). In America or other countries where there is more of a gun culture blame would likely be assigned to either that or other various factors of a violent society like television, video games, aggressive music, etc. But how do you even begin to explain David Gray? A man that lived in arguab...