Dell's Good, Bad & Ugly Movie Reviews

[Buzzman]

I think I am going to watch that next Dell, damn fine review. Gotta ask as well, did you review The Assassination of Jesse James before?

 

[dell71]

Wall-E
Directed by Andrew Stanton.
2008. Rated G, 98 minutes.
Cast:
Ben Burtt
Elissa Knight
Jeff Garlin
Fred Willard​

Plot: WALL-E is a sanitation robot who sets out everyday to clean up the abandoned Earth. One day a ship appears and drops of another robot, EVE, and WALL-E falls head over heels for "her." As her purpose for being there becomes clear, it leads to an adventure of monumental importance and way more than either bargained for.

The Good: The typical characters for the genre are all there: the clueless hero, the not so interested at first love interest, the funny sidekick. However, the way they're represented here is far different from what we're used to seeing. For instance, the funny sidekick isn't some mile-a-minute talking semi-cute furry animal, it's a cockroach. Better yet, even though their intents are always clear, the robots still communicate mechanically so "spoken" lines by them are minimal at most. It's not until we meet some real humans well into the movie that we actually get any semblance of "regular" conversation. This gives the humor a subtle touch. The filmmakers showed real trust in their material and confidence in their audience by going this route instead of hitting them over the head with the repeated slapstick. And it NEVER loses anyone. There may be a thing or two parents might have to explain to kids but if you don't they'll get the overall idea just the same.

The Bad: There were a couple of plot-holes that reared their ugly heads when it came time for the "exciting conclusion." Yes, I picked up on them but they're not game-changers. Also, the animation didn't "wow" me. It was actually sort of uneven because every now and then there's an absolutely photo-realistic looking shot followed by some rather cartoonish ones. Again, that's just nit-picking and most people probably won't notice.

The Ugly: WALL-E loses to the shopping carts.

Recommendation: This is one fam-friendly flick I recommend even if you don't have children. It's funny but doesn't have nearly the amount of slapstick of other kiddie flicks. It also manges to leave out the ultra-annoying characters and will even require viewers to <gasp> use their brain a little!

MY SCORE: 9/10​

 

[dell71]

I think I am going to watch that next Dell, damn fine review. Gotta ask as well, did you review The Assassination of Jesse James before?

Haven't gotten around to seeing that one just yet. I've heard lots of good stuff about it, though. Have to make that a priority.

 

[Houston]

Some spoilers about Wall-E:



I loved the mood and how well done the themes were in the first part. The 2nd part of the movie though, was kind of a let down. They threw in all these annoying useless human characters and now all of a sudden I'm suppose to be rooting for them? After spending the first 45 mins watching nothing but the 2 robots(and the roach), I couldn't care less about the human condition.

I know it's probably just me, but I wish they would've left some of the human part to the imagination. A ton of the focus got taken off of Wall-E and his main goal that they spent the entire 1st half focusing on.

 

[FirstTimer]

What were the plot holes Dell?

Just curious because I usually always zone out and miss that stuff.

 

[dell71]

What were the plot holes Dell?

Just curious because I usually always zone out and miss that stuff.

For me, the big one is...

 

why let EVE go back to Earth in the first place if the computer that runs the ship is under the directive to never let the humans return?

There are others...

http://www.madmind.de/2009/01/25/ten-plot-holes-and-errors-in-wall-e/

 

[dell71]

How to Be a Serial Killer
<strong>Directed by Luke Ricci.</strong>
<em>2009. Rated R, 88 minutes.
Cast:
Dameon Clarke
Matthew Gray Gubler
Laura Regan
George Wyner</em>​

Mike Wilson (Clarke) is a serial killer and proud of it. So much so, he doesn’t mind sharing his knowledge of the ins and outs of recreational murder. While perusing the aisles at the local video store he meets Bart (Gubler) who works there. When he sees Bart getting berated by a customer, Mike decides to help out the best way he knows. A short while later, the rude patron is dead and Mike takes Bart on as his protégé.

Bart asks tons of questions while tagging along on Mike’s excursions and Mike is only too happy to share. He answers his trainee’s inquiries in two ways. The first is simply him answering in the most obvious way: face to face. The other way is more geared towards us, the viewers. To this end, the movie is broken up into 10 lessons. Each lesson is given by Mike standing on a stage. Stylistically, this is a straight rip from <em>Bronson</em>, another movie about a career criminal. However, just like it does there, it works. After his little spiel, we switch back to “the real world”.

Speaking of “The Real World,” we’ve arrived at my chief gripe with this movie. Ever since that show first became a hit on MTV roughly two decades ago television, particularly reality TV has been littered with people speaking directly to the camera about their feelings on what we’ve just seen or what we are about to see. <em>How to Be a Serial Killer</em> utilizes this tactic, as well. It’s a tired gimmick that only serves to repeatedly stop the flow of what is otherwise a morbidly enjoyable dark comedy.

Thankfully, through it all we have the gleefully insane performance of Dameon Clarke in the lead role. His character is not one we should like, but has a personality we’re drawn to. Clarke balances this very nicely. Of course, since it looks like the whold movie was made for roughly five bucks and very few of us know anyone who’s even heard of it, his work has gone completely unnoticed. As Bart, Gubler holds his own and has managed bigger and better things in his career (he plays on TV’s “Criminal Minds”). The two of them, plus the Herculean effort their characters put forth to keep all this a secret from Mike’s girlfriend Abigail (Regan) keeps us intrigued. The movie has its shortcomings, but it’s still low-budget, twisted fun.

<strong>MY SCORE: 7/10</strong>​

 

[Senser81]

If watched just on a surface level, you’ll probably just wonder what the big deal is and have a little less trust in my judgment.

Is that possible??

X-Men: First Class
<strong>Directed by Matthew Vaughn.</strong>
<em>2011. Rated PG-13, 132 minutes.
Cast:
Kevin Bacon
</em>

<strong>MY SCORE: 7.5/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

The Mechanic
<strong>Directed by Simon West.</strong>
<em>2011. Rated R, 92 minutes.
Cast:
Jason Statham
Ben Foster
Tony Goldwyn
Donald Sutherland
Jeff Chase
Mini Anden</em>​

Bishop (Statham) is a gifted hitman specializing in unconventional kills. He’s also all business. So when his next target is his only friend in the world, he only raises a small fuss before doing the job. As expected, this is only the tip of the iceberg. Bishop finding out what’s below the surface by accident ensues. The main thing that happens isn’t quite an accident, but definitely not a planned event. Bishop meets his buddy’s estranged son Steve (Foster). Yes, the same buddy he just killed. By what can’t be considered good logic, he takes Steve under his wing, training him in the ways of assassination. A remake of the 1972 film starring Charles Bronson.

For whatever problems this movie has, and it does have problems, time is not among them. It’s a brisk ninety minutes that feels like sixty. Like it, or not, sitting through it doesn’t feel like a chore. You hit the close button on your DVD player and a few moments later, the credits are rolling. In an era where lots of movies stretch themselves out to well over two hours for no good reason other than justifying their bloated budgets, this element is refreshing.

With that previous stuff said, it can move a little too fast. Another ten or fifteen minutes wouldn’t have hurt anything. In fact, it would’ve helped things develop into something approaching logical. Bishop continually and willfully breaks his own rules for no apparent reason. Meanwhile, Steve almost magically becomes an expert “mechanic” (that’s the slang here for hitman). The overall effect is that the story is strangely more preposterous than the action. By the way, the action is very well done. The movie is also predictable. It pretends we don’t know who’s who. However, within five seconds of him appearing on the screen we know the identity of the villain. This robs us of intrigue and possibly having empathy for our heroes. The very end throws us a nice curveball, but its not quite enough to save the whole thing. That’s because instead of being engrossed in the story, we’re merely watching things happen in front of us.

<strong>MY SCORE: 5.5/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Yogi Bear
<strong>Directed by Eric Brevig.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated PG, 80 minutes.
Cast:
Dan Akroyd
Justin Timberlake
Anna Faris
Tom Cavanagh
T. J. Miller
Andrew Daly
Nathan Corddry</em>​

Just because you CAN do something, doesn’t mean you should. If I so choose, I can walk up to any or all of my three children and beat them mercilessly. I think we can all agree that I shouldn’t. Sure, the technology exists to make a live-action movie about a computer generated talking bear and his sidekick based on a late 1950s/early 1960s cartoon. That doesn’t mean it should be done. It should be done if you have an interesting and/or funny story to tell or at least an updated take on the characters. It should not be done if you’re just going to recycle the same garbage from thousands of other crappy movies in an apparent cash-grab. Guess which approach is taken by the full-length feature film <em>Yogi Bear</em>?

If you must know, the plot really is the same as countless other movies. It’s so derivative, to call it paint-by-numbers would be insulting to people who paint by numbers and consider themselves real artists. Step 1: Introduce lovable, but dopey and mischievous protagonist. Of course, that’s Yogi (Akroyd). Step 2: Put said character in an environment he or she loves so much they couldn’t imagine life without it. Often, this is a house or a rec center or something that can reasonably be considered a landmark. In this case, it’s Jellystone Park. Step 3: Put said landmark in such financially dire straits it’s in danger of being foreclosed upon and/or destroyed at a fast approaching deadline. Here, it’s a week. Step 4: Have the effort to take away the landmark spearheaded by a greedy bank executive or a greedy politician. We get Mayor Brown (Daly). Step 5: Have the protagonist band together with his or her friends to either enter a contest and win or otherwise raise enough money just in time to save the landmark. Yogi and his cohorts opt for the latter. Don’t even try to tell me you haven’t seen this movie already. Just in the last six months or so I’ve seen it at least three times. It was billed as <em>Step Up 3D, Beverly Hills Chihuahua 2</em> and <em>Stomp the Yard: Homecoming</em>. It sucked each time. I can assure you this keeps the streak alive.

You know what? All might be forgiven if this were funny. Sadly, it’s so far from funny, well, it’s not even…funny. The extent of the humor here is Yogi steps on, touches or leans against something and gets hit in the face, knocked down, flung through the air, etc. Verbal jokes are boiled down to him saying “pic-a-nic” instead of “picnic” over and over and over…and over again. Occasionally someone farts, references farting, or makes a farting noise. To be blunt, this movie thinks kids are dumb. Sure, some will laugh at first. However, after about ten minutes they will realize the well is dry. I’ll give the slow ones fifteen before the chuckles stop.

Believe it, or not, this could’ve still been salvaged. Had there been some real nostalgic value or the kids in the target audience already had a connection with the characters that might’ve been enough to save the day. The problem there? We’re talking about a 50 year old cartoon that’s been largely forgotten! Most of the kids this flick is aimed at never heard of Yogi Bear until they started seeing commercials for this…this…this odious pile of digital excrement! Most of their parents are too young to be Yogi fans! Because of this trash and <em>Marmaduke</em> and the <em>Garfield</em> movies and the <em>Alvin and the Chipmunks</em> movies I am dreading the day when morbid curiosity gets the best of me and I just have to see for myself exactly how bad the movie for one of my favorite 80s cartoons, <em>The Smurfs</em> turns out. Trust me, it’s going to be bad. You heard it here, first. And just in case we’re not clear on this, the fact that this <em>Yogi Bear</em> movie exists makes the world suck just a little bit more.

<strong>MY SCORE: 0/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Ip Man
<strong>Directed by Wilson Yip.</strong>
<em>2008. Rated R, 106 minutes.
Cast:
Donnie Yen
Simon Yam
Siu-Wong Fan
Ka Tung Lam
Yu Xing
You-Nam Wong
Chen Zhi Hui</em>​

The Chinese city of Fo-Shan is famous for its martial arts. No one in town is more famous than Master Ip (Yen) AKA Ip Man. Though he doesn’t teach formally, young hopefuls are constantly seeking his counsel. When other masters want to test their mettle, they challenge him to a duel. It’s only natural that when some tough guys from out of town want to prove themselves worthy of opening up their own school in Fo-Shan they wind up on the doorstep of Ip’s palatial estate. All of this is in the days just before the Japanese invading China and pretty much taking over Fo-Shan. They even set up shop in Ip’s house, leaving the master, his wife and young son to find shelter in parts of town destroyed by bombings. Ip is forced to take hard labor jobs to get just barely enough food for his family avoid starving to death. What good is all his knowledge and skill in the art of hand-to-hand combat in a world where he and his fellow countrymen have been relegated to second class citizenship in their own land?

<em>Ip Man</em> is loosely based on the life of Bruce Lee’s mentor. It combines the larger themes of survival, cultural preservation and national pride and combines them with the more traditional kung-fu motifs of revenge and honor to create a rather concise epic that neither overstays its welcome nor rushes us along from fight to fight. It works both narratively and viscerally. It’s story-telling isn’t groundbreaking, but it is effective. The fighting is wonderfully brutal. Even as our tale develops and twists, the next action scene is never too far away nor too near. Let’s face it, we watch martial arts movies for the martial arts. This film understands this, gives us plenty of it but doesn’t sacrifice narration.

To make those fight scenes work, we need a star who can pull them off. In the title role, Donnie Yen is a delightful blur of flying fists punctuated by his long gown-like shirt flapping in his self-created wind. Appropriately placed close-ups reveal the landing of many bone-crushing blows. I was moved to say “ouch” on a number of occasions. For fans of martial arts flicks <em>Ip Man</em> is a must-see. It is the best such movie of the last several years by a good margin. Of course, if you’re not into martial arts flicks then skip it. Shame on you.

<strong>MY SCORE: 8/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Love & Other Drugs
<strong>Directed by Edward Zwick.</strong>
<em>2010. Rated R, 112 minutes.
Cast:
Jake Gyllenhaal
Anne Hathaway
Oliver Platt
Hank Azaria
Josh Gad
Gabriel Macht
Judy Greer
Jill Clayburgh
George Segal</em>​

After losing his job as a stereo equipment saleman, Jamie (Gyllenhaal) decides to give the pharmaceudical industry a try. He takes a job as a sales rep for Pfizer. Basically, he hangs around private practices hocking Zoloft to the doctors. We most often see him at Dr. Knight’s (Azaria) office. While there, he manages to talk the doc into letting him be present during a visit from a patient. That patient is 26 year old Maggie (Hathaway) who has already been diagnosed with Parkinson’s Disease. Of course, Jamie is immediately head-over-heels in love with her, but she wants nothing to do with him. Ever the smooth talking ladies man, he navigates that little hurdle and talks her into a date. Right away, the two start a relationship they both agree is only about sex. Well, if things were that easy we wouldn’t have a movie, would we? Anyhoo, this is all set in the days leading up to the initial public release of Viagra. This becomes prominent in several ways I won’t reveal.

Things start off in an amusing manner. Jamie’s rich younger brother Josh (Gad) has been kicked out by his wife and taken up residence on big bro’s couch. Sales manager Bruce (Platt) is constantly prodding his young protégé to sell more. Prozac salesman Trey (Macht) has the upperhand and is constantly in their way. Dr. Knight is openly selling his loyalty to whichever rep can get him laid the most. Through all of this Jamie and Maggie actually do get laid, a lot…by each other. If you want to see Anne Hathaway in (almost) all her glory this is the movie for you.

It’s our favorite couple’s interactions between lovemaking sessions that try to attach us emotionally to the movie, but fail. The problem is pretty much as soon as he rolls off of her she starts with an unstoppable wave of self-pity, questioning his motives for sleeping with “the sick girl”, as she refers to herself and imploring him to stay away from her. He stubbornly refuses and back and forth they go. We’re supposed to be sympathetic towards their plight because of her disease. However, it’s much more tiresome than endearing. I have to remind you that the peripheral events all seem to work pretty well. They’re entertaining and light. When juxtaposed with them, the heavy relationship at the film’s core is jarring and transparently manipulative, ineffectively tugging on our heartstrings.

<strong>MY SCORE: 5.5/10</strong>​

 

[Houston]

Dell's Classics Presents: A Film Noir Double Feature

Double Indemnity
1944. Not Rated, 108 minutes.
Director: Billy Wilder.
Starring Fred MacMurray, Barbara Stanwyck, Edward G. Robinson, Jean Heather.
An insurance agent (MacMurray) falls in love with the wife of a client (Stanwyck). The two then hatch a plan to kill her husband so they can collect the insurance money and be together. This is Film Noir 101. All of the elements of the genre: the narration, dame that gets ultra-cool guy in hot water, murder and slick slang are not only present but have seldom, if ever, been done better. The dialogue is insanely sharp, filled with sexual innuendo, humor and thoughtfulness at appropriate times. The story keeps you on your toes, introducing elements that subtly change your idea of what you think will happen up until right before the climax. At that point, our hero tells you what's going to happen, or at least what he plans on, and instead of it being a let down it intrigues us even more because we've seen how his plans have worked out so far. MacMurray and Stanwyck are both marvelous in the lead roles and have great chemistry with one another. Robinson, not getting top billing for the first time in a career which was starting to wane by this point, conveys a fierce determination the couple in question must fear. He does so with one of more subdued, but no less excellent performances. Any fans of film noir, or film buffs in general, must see this movie. This is the movie most recent efforts of the genre take their cues from, even something so over the top as Sin City or as experimental as the underappreciated Brick.
MY SCORE: 10/10

Not possible to say it any better.



*Spoilers*


Barbara Stanwyck(Phyllis) did one hell of a job acting in that movie. The chemistry between her character and Neff was amazing. From the first time they met and exchange the "flirtatious" innuendo's, to their final scene together inside of the house.


I fully expected the movie to end with Neff's confession, I was surprised when Keye's walked in and interrupted him in the middle of it. Then he ends up lighting his cigarette for him as he's dying. If this isn't Film Noir 101, I don't know what is.

 

[dell71]

Big Fish
<strong>Directed by Tim Burton.</strong>
<em>2003. Rated PG-13, 125 minutes.
Cast:
Ewan McGregor
Albert Finney
Billy Crudup
Jessica lange
Helena Bonham Carter
Steve Buscemi
Robert Guillaume
Alison Lohman
Marion Cotillard
Ada Tai
Arlene Tai</em>​

As long as anyone can remember Ed Bloom (McGregor and Finney playing the younger and older versions, respectively) spent his days telling one tall tale after another. He’s told so many, so often that his adult son Will (Crudup) resents him. Will doesn’t feel he knows anything about his dad. Now that Ed is dying, Will is determined to separate the facts from fiction in all those stories.

Like all of director Tim Burton’s work <em>Big Fish</em> is visually arresting. It’s technicolor backdrops contrasted with goth-inspired characters. From time to time there are amazing occurrences within this dynamic. When necessary, that dynamic changes. The scenery becomes darker and foreboding. It even does some crazy things on its own. If there’s one thing Burton is a master of its making the settings in his films not only places, but living, breathing characters. Such is the case, here. It interacts with the others. Some of these others are gleefully odd human beings. The question that lingers throughout is: is any of this real, or is it all a figment of Ed’s imagination?

The screenplay is expertly written, keeping us off-balance and just as desperate as Will to get to the bottom of things. Within our quest for the truth, we witness a father and son dealing with their issues. The women in their lives largely offer support to their men from the sidelines. In other movies, this might seem sexist, or at least neglectful. Here they, and we, realize any resolution to Ed and Will’s problems with each other has to come from them with as little interference as possible. What we also find are little morsels of humor. They’re subtle, often light and occasionally morbid in true Burton fashion.

The one knock I have on <em>BF</em> is that our ending is too easy. However, this is also in keeping with what Burton usually does. His visuals contains lots of oddities and things more than slightly askew. Still, he maintains mainstream appeal with easily digestable tales that strive to be heartwarming. This is, but it seems to do so by abandoning the idea of doing what it seems to set out to: challenging our beliefs about reality and fantasy. This is still an excellent film, it just feels like it could be much more.

<strong>MY SCORE: 8/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Sucker Punch
<strong>Directed by Zack Snyder.</strong>
<em>2011. Rated PG-13, 110 minutes.
Cast:
Emily Browning
Abbie Cornish
Jena Malone
Vanessa Hudgens
Jamie Chung
Carla Gugino
Oscar Isaac
Scott Glenn
Gerard Plunkett</em>​

After her mother dies, Baby Doll (Browning) is attacked by her stepdad. Obviously, it was a struggle for him to wait until his wife kicked because he goes on the prowl moments after the funeral. Apparently finding Baby Doll a bit more of a struggle than he wants just then, or perhaps saving her for later, he manages to lock her in her room and then starts in on her younger, much smaller sister. Since our heroine can’t let stepdad get his satisfaction she gets out of the room and gets a loaded gun and confronts this clown. Just to show she’s serious, Baby Doll fires off a warning shot. Oops. Little sis winds up all dead and stuff over in a corner. Daddy Dearest then has BD hauled off to an insane asylum run by some shady characters. He even slips the guy in charge a few extra bucks to make sure she gets lobotomized in five days. I hate when that happens.

All of this takes place before and right after the opening credits. Truthfully, only the end result is relevant. The elaborate set up is interesting, but unnecessary. She could’ve simply been perceived as crazy and arrived at exactly the same place. However, elaborately is the only way this movie does anything. Not surprising since it has the same director, it has a look reminiscent of <em>300</em> with nearly as much slo-mo, super slo-mo and bullet-time effects. The heavy metal soundtrack blares brazenly while things onscreen hiss, boom, shatter and pop. All the while, the camera follows a team of girls draped in fetishistic and/or militaristic garb and kicking all sorts of robot tail. If you let it, it can be big fun. That is, until you get to the end wonder what you just watched.

Speaking wondering what you just watched, where do the robots come from? Well, shortly and suddenly our insane asylum transforms into a brothel. I’ll let you figure out the how and why of that one on your own. Anyoo, BD is made to dance. In a total shock for this movie, there’s no pole involved. Still, when she dances everyone in her onscreen audience is so mesmerized they cease all bodily function except for watching her. Unfortunately, or fortunately, we never see BD dance. Along with her, we enter the dreamworld in the trance she falls into. Here, she receives orders from Wise Man (Glenn) about the next object she tries to obtain by fighting her and the team’s way through hordes of robots. By the way, if you couldn’t figure it out the team is made up of other girls in the looney bin. Each object gets the whole crew closer to escape from the real asylum. Get it? The actual connection is made a little better than that, but it’s still convoluted.

Overall, <em>Sucker Punch</em> is a fun looking mess. The visuals are a treat, but the pieces to the story don’t quite fit in a cohesive manner. First off, there are too many of them. A surplus of things that could’ve been discarded are kept. Conversely, we get the feeling plenty of things that should’ve been kept are thrown out. Second, none of the characters are written well enough for us to really care what happens to them. They’re just mannequins in the window striking poses appropriate for the gear they’re wearing. Worst of all, the movie is horribly inconsistent about what happens to people in the room when BD dances. Who is and isn’t effected changes based on what’s convenient for the plot at any given moment. Finally, I have a question. Why on God’s green earth did Zack Snyder allow Carla Gugino to keep going with her ridiculously bad Russian accent after the first day of shooting? For that alone, he should be sucker punched.

<strong>MY SCORE: 4/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Rodrick Rules
<strong>Directed by David Bowers.</strong>
<em>2011. Rated PG, 99 minutes.
Cast:
Zachary Gordon
Devon Bostick
Rachael Harris
Robert Capron
Steve Zahn
Connor Fielding
Owen Fielding
Peyton List
Karan Brar
Laine MacNeil</em>​

Greg (Gordon) is back for a second middle-school adventure. Most of the angst he experienced in sixth grade is gone. His biggest social hurdle nowadays is trying to figure out how to approach the school’s very pretty new girl. His real problems are at home where big brother Rodrick (Bostick) tortures him on a daily basis. Meanwhile, Mom (Harris) is completely bent on making her boys get along so that her real life is as perfect as she portrays it in her newspaper column. Sibling rivalry hijinks and shenanigans ensue.

Often, sequels attempt to do everything bigger than their predecessors. The larger scale tends to translate into a loss of focus on the things we liked about the previous movie. A curious thing happens in <em>Rodrick Rules</em>. It actually has a smaller scope than the original. A number of characters are either eliminated or relegated to lesser roles. Greg’s interaction with the sizable school community is replaced with what goes on at home between at home between the brothers and/or mom. Even Dad (Zahn) is just kinda there for long stretches. Despite all this it still feels less focused than the first film. It’s certainly less ambitious, feeling more like a long episode of a Disney Channel sitcom than a movie. This means the target audience will probably still like it. Us parents, not so much this time around.

<em>RR</em> does have its moments. There are pockets of goodness scattered here and there as reminders of what once was. Not surprisingly, most of these moments happen in school. The movie shines when depicting the often Darwinist society of pre-teens. It falls flat when away from this setting because Greg’s family is made up of the same caricatures we’ve seen rehashed for decades. Their worst offense is they’re not funny, making this a bit of a chore to sit through for adults. Kids will likely enjoy it while it’s on, but forget about it five minutes after its over.

<strong>MY SCORE: 4.5/10</strong>​

 

[dell71]

I Saw the Devil
<strong>Directed by Jee-woon Kim.</strong>
<em>2010. Not Rated, 141 minutes.
Cast:
Byung-hun Lee
Min-sik Choi
Gook-hwan Jeon
Ho-jin Jeon
San-ha Oh
Yoon-seo Kim</em>​

Joo-yeon (Oh) is stranded on the side of the road on a snowy night with a flat tire. She is on the phone with her husband Kim Soo-hyeon (Lee) who is also a secret agent of some sort. In fact, he’s at work at this precise moment. A stranger approaches Joo-Yeon’s door, offering to help. Wisely, and with the agreement of her hubby, she only cracks the window enough to tell him she going to wait on the tow truck she’s already called. Obviously, they’ve seen a horror movie or two. Pretty soon, duty calls and hubby has to hang up the phone and get back to work. Just in case you can’t figure out where all this is going the creepy dude bashes in Joo-yeon’s window, knocks her out in a most untidy manner and drags her, quite literally at some points, back to his place. That’s when he really has his fun. Suffice it to say when the police find her, it’s not all at once. Trust me, this is only the beginning of a very bumpy ride.

Not one to sit idly by, Kim decides he’s going after the bad guy himself. Don’t you worry. This movie won’t bore you with detective work. He quickly learns the police have four main susupects who have been accused of similar crimes in the past. He immediately takes bereavement leave and starts tracking them down where they live and does some not so nice things to them.

Eventually, Kim not only gets to the right guy, but there is no doubt about it. That guy is Kyung-chul played by Min-sik Choi. Fans of Park Chan-wook’s “Trilogy of Vengeance” will remember him from the two best movies in that series, <em>Lady Vengeance</em> and most notably as our hero in <em>Oldboy.</em> Here, he the other side of the coin and barely recognizable (that’s him in the pic). He’s a completely amoral merciless homicidal maniac. Much like Javier Bardem’s performance in <em>No Country for Old Men</em>, he goes about his business in an awfully calm manner making him far more menacing than he would’ve been had he been a screaming, raging lunatic. It’s a remarkable performance.

The two men meet rather early in the movie. Because they do, a question presents itself and weaves itself into the fabric of the movie: To truly get revenge on a monster, do you have to become one yourself. It seems Kim does. Whenever our two combatants square off there are considerable fireworks. Kim is not content with merely killing Kyung-chul. He wants to make him suffer as much as possible which involves tracking him down beating him half to death and maiming him in some way then letting him go so he can do it all over again.

Between their meetings there is great tension and, thanks to our villain’s excursions plenty more very nasty happenings. This movie is not for the squeamish. It may be one of the more brutally violent films you’ll ever see. Still, despite the seemingly gallons of blood spilled and dozens of blows to various heads with heavy blunt objects (pipe, fire extinguisher, etc), this is no simple gore-fest. It blends the genres horror, thriller and action to create an unflinching and slyly complex revenge flick. It’s one downfall, aside from the violence if that’s too much for you, is that the end is a bit predictable. However, even then the manner in which it’s handled is brilliantly grotesque. Then we have to decide whether this ordeal was really worth it for the one left standing. As the credits roll bringing our thrilling and disturbing journey to a close we still have one more important question to ponder: Who really won?

<strong>MY SCORE: 9/10</strong>​

 

[Buzzman]

I've had that on my list forever, but keep passing on it for some damn reason. Going to watch it tomorrow. Damn Good review.

 

[Houston]

Speaking of 2010 Korean films have you heard of this one? The reviews and accolades have been great.

I tried to watch it today but it wasn't on the site I always go to

 

[dell71]

Speaking of 2010 Korean films have you heard of this one? The reviews and accolades have been great.

I tried to watch it today but it wasn't on the site I always go to

I've heard of it, but not anything in particular about it. I'll have to check it out. Thanks.