Reviews by PvtCaboose91

"I'm so glad we left the city. This is such a good place to raise a family."

In the very first scene of Grown Ups 2, Lenny (Adam Sandler) awakens inside his suburban home to find a deer casually hanging out in his bedroom. When his wife Roxanne (Salma Hayek) notices the beast, her screams cause the deer to nervously urinate all over Lenny's face. Following this, the deer runs wildly through the house, peeing on another family member and wreaking havoc. That's just the first few minutes of this rancid film. And right before the end credits begin to roll, Lenny farts while in bed with Roxanne. This is about all you need to know about Grown Ups 2, the lousy follow-up to 2010's disappointing but somehow still successful Grown Ups. Things are no better between the scenes that bookend the film, spotlighting Lenny and friends Eric (Kevin James), Kurt (Chris Rock) and Marcus (David Spade) aimlessly moving from place to place, leading to dumb jokes and tired slapstick that's never actually funny. Even Rob Schneider was unwilling to clear his schedule to star in this dreck. Ponder that for a second...

A lot of scorn can be tossed at Sandler's output over the past decade, but at least movies like Jack and Jill had an actual plot, adhering to a coherent structure complete with a beginning, middle and end. Grown Ups 2, on the other hand, literally has no plot or story. It's a string of vignettes, none of which are tied together in any way resembling a narrative. There are actually three credited screenwriters, which is fucking retarded, as Grown Ups 2 is just a random showcase of celebrity cameos and staggeringly terrible CGI. For crying out loud, it's so bad that it has actually prompted me to reference fucking Jack and Jill as a positive example!

There is no semblance of realism to anything that occurs throughout Grown Ups 2. The film is set up as something of a "day in the life" tale, yet nothing is relatable here, with a sense of Hollywood sensationalism hanging over all of the proceedings. For instance, Lenny's son wants a shot with the hottest girl in school and manages to win her over with no effort. In another half-formed subplot, Marcus has a son he never knew about, and although the boy is standoffish and arrogant towards his father, the pair suddenly bond without the audience for unknown reasons. Ostensibly the main narrative thread involves Lenny and Roxanne having another kid, but Dugan pays barely any attention to this malarkey, which is given no weight in the grand scheme of things. Grown Ups 2 is all about idiotic skits, after all - expecting logic or humanity from this nonsense is foolhardy.

With its haphazard structure, Grown Ups 2 feels like an episode of Saturday Night Live, especially since SNL alumni are all over the place, with Nick Swardson, Peter Dante, Steve Buscemi, and even Sandler's wife Jackie making brief appearances. Stretching the ridiculous budget to breaking point (seriously, this crap cost $80 million to produce?!), various other celebrities and pop culture figures show up for no discernible reason. Steve Austin, Jon Lovitz and Shaquille O'Neal are all present, while Arnold Schwarzenegger's son Patrick makes precisely little impact as a frat boy in the background. Astonishingly, the only actor who's worth a damn is Taylor Lautner, who goes for broke in his cartoonish role of a frat boy. Abandoning his self-seriousness from the Twilight films, Lautner is amusing here, embracing the ridiculousness and essentially parodying himself, showing that he does have potential as a comedic performer. But it's a serious problem that Taylor Lautner is the only funny one in this movie, scoring more laughs than Chris Rock. What the fuck?!

The order of the day in Grown Ups 2 is unfunny pratfalls, juvenile sight gags, and repeated returns to Eric's ability to burp, sneeze and fart in quick succession. It climaxes with an '80s party, which involves a brawl between the party guests and the frat boys, spurred on by local law enforcement, who don't seem to care about the myriad of assaults occurring all around them. In the hands of a comedic team who actually knows a thing about orchestrating hilarious nonsense, this might have been amusing. But it was handled by the tone-deaf Dennis Dugan, a veteran of Sandler awfulness, who makes the whole thing strangely boring and lousy. Grown Ups 2 has no rhythm or cohesion, but above all no purpose - there is no story, the characters remain unchanged by the end, and there are no satisfying laughs to be had. It's one of Sandler's worst, and that's saying something. It should be fucking banned.

1.8/10

"If history has determined that gods can die, it is also proven that they may return from the dead. It would seem you cannot be destroyed after all, Superman. It would seem."

Superman/Doomsday finds Clark Kent/Superman (Adam Baldwin) already set in his daily routine, working at the Daily Planet while carrying on a romantic relationship with reporter Lois Lane (Anne Heche), who doesn't know his true identity. Lex Luthor (James Marsters) uncovers an alien spacecraft during an excavation, which unleashes an unstoppable doomsday machine that seeks to destroy every living thing in its path. Arriving in Metropolis, Superman is confronted with the formidable Doomsday, testing him like nothing before. Superman defeats Doomsday but dies as a consequence, forcing the city to confront the reality of a world without their saviour. Crime rates are on the rise, and Lois feels more vulnerable than ever, but the Man of Steel suddenly comes back from the dead. While it's cause for celebration, Superman begins acting very suspiciously.

The first in what became a long-running series of DC Universe Animated Original Movies, 2007's Superman/Doomsday is a 77-minute retelling of three major storylines from the Superman comics: The Death of Superman, World without a Superman, and Return of Superman. It's more or less a pared-down version of the comic books, stripping away certain characters and subplots to provide a simplistic representation of this story arc. But instead of focusing on one storyline for better effect, writers Duane Capizzi and Bruce Timm compress all basic plot points from Death to Return into the script without giving each story the breadth and runtime that they deserve. In fact, Doomsday becomes a secondary presence in his own movie, relegated to only the first third. The battle between Superman and Doomsday is impressive, but it's over far too soon, and Superman's death does not have as much emotional resonance as it should. The truncation of the source looks all the more disappointing in 2023 following the release of the positively epic two-part adaptation of The Dark Knight Returns, which did genuine justice to the rich source material. Thankfully, this was later rectified with a two-part animated movie about the Death and Return of Superman released in 2018 and 2019.

While Superman/Doomsday is disappointingly underdone, it does tell its story in an entertaining fashion and remains eminently watchable throughout. Warner Premiere does not exactly have the funds to splash out a few hundred million dollars on the project, hence the animation is rather basic here, lacking in fine detail. Still, the animators make the most of their scant resources, creating a handful of tremendously exciting battle sequences. The throwdown between Doomsday and the Man of Steel is a highlight due to its sheer brutality. Superman/Doomsday carries a PG-13 rating and features content that is a bit stronger than what you would normally find in a kid-friendly Superman adventure. The tone here is dark and there are some intense sequences involving blood, not to mention there's some harsh language and unexpected innuendo. It's not gratuitous, though, and it does suit the nature of the material since this is a dark story. Also impressive is the cast. Voicing Superman is Adam Baldwin, better known as Jayne from Firefly. He disappears into the role, giving Supes a distinctive voice that sounds wholly different from Jayne.

Even though Superman/Doomsday fails to do justice to its expansive source material, it does work well enough as a standalone comic book movie on its own terms. Given its limitation, this is about the best retelling one could reasonably expect in this one-shot format. With its skilful if not exactly mind-blowing animation, and with terrific voice work and a great score, it's a good watch, and it'll be of interest to casual Superman fans or anyone who just enjoys superhero movies.

6.0/10

"Ladies, gentlemen, you've eaten well. You've eaten Gotham's wealth. Its spirit. But your feast is nearly over. From this moment on, none of you are safe."

In 1986, iconic graphic novel author Frank Miller shook up the comic book industry with his four-part miniseries The Dark Knight Returns, which reimagined Batman as an aged vigilante coming out of retirement to fight crime in a gritty, noir-ish vision of Gotham City. Hot on the heels of the immense acclaim, Miller teamed up with artist David Mazzucchelli for Batman: Year One and retained the intelligence and grit that defined The Dark Knight Returns to explore Batman's origins. Although Christopher Nolan used very little of Miller's ideas for Batman Begins, the source material was ideal fodder for Warner Premiere's series of DC Universe Animated Original Movies. Fortunately, Batman: Year One for the most part translates well to the format. It's not perfect, and a higher-budgeted production could've yielded a smoother adaptation, but there's a lot to enjoy here.

After spending a number of years travelling the world, millionaire Bruce Wayne (Ben McKenzie) returns to Gotham, taking up residence in his family's long-time mansion overseen by loyal butler Alfred Pennyworth (Jeff Bennett). Meanwhile, Jim Gordon (Bryan Cranston) transfers to Gotham City Police Department, only to find the city plagued with corruption and crime. Fearing for the safety of both himself and his pregnant wife, Gordon is compelled to just do his job, turning a blind eye to the corrupt activity within the force. But a glimmer of hope soon emerges for Gordon, as Wayne begins to hit the streets as Batman, cleaning up crime vigilante-style. While Gordon is ordered to investigate Batman and arrest him, the lives of both men eventually converge, leading to a mutual respect for one another and a partnership that could bring order to a city lost in chaos.

Tab Murphy's screenplay is apparently very faithful to the source, resulting in a fairly short movie that only clocks in at a bit over an hour. Unfortunately, Batman: Year One feels too short, briskly skimming over weeks and months while only spotlighting a handful of key events. Such a structure works on the pages of Miller's graphic novel since a reader can move at their own pace, but as a fast-paced screen adventure, it feels underdone and slight. A longer, more complete movie would've been superior. With that said, however, the movie in its current form is still satisfying. One of the strongest aspects of Batman: Year One is the way that it balances the stories of Bruce Wayne and Jim Gordon, observing the beginnings of both characters and allowing us to hear both of their inner monologues. Indeed, Year One carries frequent voiceovers in keeping with Miller's graphic novel, but they never grow too heavy-handed or bothersome; they enhance the experience.

As with Miller's book, Batman: Year One is a film noir interpretation of the Batman mythos, humanising the characters of Bruce Wayne and Jim Gordon. The animators do a superlative job of retaining the grit and gloom of Mazzucchelli's original artwork while giving the movie a magnificent sense of fluidity. Visually, Year One evokes noir-ish anime like Ghost in the Shell and Cowboy Bebop, and there's a thick sense of atmosphere pervading every frame. The flick especially shines during the action sequences, with hand-to-hand combat that frankly looks like motion capture work. The fights are rough and brutal, and you feel every punch and kick. Especially great are the scenes involving Catwoman; she moves in a fast, catlike fashion, and the battles are very exciting. Equally great is the music by Christopher Drake, which belies the low-budget origins of the production. Drake's score is exciting and majestic, giving the picture a genuine theatrical feel.

Batman: Year One is also bolstered by a mostly solid voice cast. Unfortunately, the weak link is McKenzie as Bruce Wayne/Batman. He's especially ineffective during the voiceover narration, coming across as bored and stiff, and he's not much better when it comes to regular dialogue. It's a completely unremarkable performance, and one must wonder why the filmmakers didn't recruit fan favourite Kevin Conroy or even Bruce Greenwood. Thankfully, Breaking Bad's Bryan Cranston picks up a lot of the slack as Jim Gordon. Cranston actually turned down the role initially but changed his mind after being exposed to Miller's layered storytelling. He's easily the star of the show, and it doesn't sound like he's just reading lines for the sake of a paycheque. Year One features a pretty impressive roster of supporting players, including character actor Alex Rocco as mob boss Carmine Falcone, Katee Sackhoff who's downright lovely as Detective Sarah Essen, and a very bubbly Eliza Dushku as Selina Kyle, better known as Catwoman. Batman purists might be shocked to find that Kyle is, in fact, a prostitute in this story...

Despite its shortcomings, Batman: Year One is a smart, faithful animated action-adventure that gets more right than wrong. It's a must for die-hard Batman fans or for anyone who just enjoys watching comic book movies. Year One was actually planned to be a live-action movie helmed by Darren Aronofsky back before Batman Begins was made. While that prospect sounds very enticing indeed, and would have probably been a downright masterpiece, this animated production is good enough for now.

7.2/10

"I ask one thing in return: a front seat to watch Earth burn."

With Iron Man 3 having kicked off Phase Two of Marvel's highly lucrative superhero franchise, 2013's Thor: The Dark World represents the next piece of the cinematic puzzle that will culminate with another Avengers extravaganza in 2015. Directed by television veteran Alan Taylor (Game of Thrones, The Sopranos, Mad Men), this second screen outing for the God of Thunder is a suitably lavish fantasy adventure, but, although it's fun in places, it's not an entirely satisfying addition to the Marvel canon. Taylor reportedly clashed with Marvel executives over the film's tone and content, and there's evidence of creative battles all over the finished product. It does possess a sense of grandeur at times, but for the most part, The Dark World feels entirely made by a committee, in need of a stronger creative vision.

Picking up in the aftermath of The Avengers and about two years after the events of the first film, Thor (Chris Hemsworth) has brought his brother Loki (Tom Hiddleston) to face justice in Asgard. With Loki imprisoned under orders from King Odin (Anthony Hopkins), Thor becomes concerned with bringing peace to the Nine Realms, but the universe is threatened by the re-emergence of the Dark Elves, led by the vengeful Malekith (Christopher Eccleston). Meanwhile, on Earth, Thor's mortal love, Jane Foster (Natalie Portman), becomes an unwitting vessel for an ancient evil called the Aether. With Asgard under siege and Jane in danger, Thor reluctantly teams up with Loki to prevent the realms from falling into Malekith's hands.

Above all else, The Dark World is marred by its lack of substance and humanity. 2011's Thor was deftly handled by director Kenneth Branagh, whose background in dramas perfectly prepared him for the task of humanising these characters. Unfortunately, the ensemble in this sequel is less interesting. Thor is inherently a one-dimensional character, an aspect that's increasingly apparent throughout The Dark World. Whereas the first movie introduced an absorbing arc for Thor, part deux is less interested in such depth, rendering this an exceedingly surface-level experience. Since there is so much exposition to explain the elaborate mythology, the lack of a human touch results in leaden pacing between the colourful action scenes. Moreover, the film feels too emaciated at about 110 minutes. The war between the Nine Realms is especially underdone, as this aspect does not feel as substantial as one would expect. Still, The Dark World does have its charms. There's a welcome smattering of humour throughout, probably thanks to Joss Whedon's emergency script polish at the eleventh hour. Plus, the movie closes on a cliffhanger of sorts that brilliantly builds anticipation for future Marvel productions.

Fortunately, The Dark World springs to life during isolated sequences in which Taylor imbues the production with the same brand of grittiness that defined Game of Thrones. The scene is set with a terrific opening battle sequence which makes good use of Taylor's GoT experience with its medieval vibe and forest setting. It's over a bit too soon, to be sure, but Taylor orchestrates the set-piece with a sure hand, displaying smooth mise-en-scène that's carried over to other parts of the picture. The climax in London is also notable, as it's both thrilling and enjoyably comedic. Another huge asset is composer Brian Tyler (Iron Man 3), who provides a score that's suitably rousing and intense, not to mention epic with its orchestral disposition. However, despite mostly competent production values, some of the CGI is strangely obvious and shoddy, and the Dark Elves look cheap. In fact, the villains as a whole are underwhelming, with only Adewale Akinnuoye-Agbaje making an impression in a minor henchman role.

One of the biggest charms of The Dark World is the return of several actors from the original film. As the God of Thunder, Hemsworth could hardly be better cast. Well and truly comfortable in the role at this point, the Australian beefcake has plenty of charisma and gravitas, making him an ideal protagonist. But it should come as no surprise to learn that it's Hiddleston's Loki who walks away with the entire movie. More scenes featuring Loki were filmed in post-production, and it was a wise choice. Hiddleston is a playful villain, charismatic and unpredictable, and he savours every snarl and wisecrack. Indeed, a lot of the humour stems from Hiddleston, who clearly had a ball playing the role. Also returning here is Hopkins, always a pleasure on-screen as Odin. He is somewhat underused, but Hopkins is great, giving the king a thunderingly powerful demeanour. Portman is good here, too, while Kat Dennings is an utter delight in her expanded role as Jane's friend Darcy. Plenty of other performers also return, including Stellan Skarsgård as Dr. Erik Selvig, Idris Elba as Heimdall, as well as Ray Stevenson and Jaimie Alexander as a pair of Thor's friends. Suffice it to say, all of them hit their marks effectively. Chris O'Dowd has a nice cameo, too, making the most of his limited screen-time.

Ultimately, Thor: The Dark World falls towards the lower end of the Marvel spectrum, somewhere between the fun mediocrity of Iron Man 2 and the dismal misfire of The Incredible Hulk. While it does admittedly deliver well enough as pure entertainment and contributes a decent amount to the Marvel franchise mythology, it's still pretty messy, and a considerable step down after the first Thor. It's not terrible by any means, but it's below the usual Marvel standard. Be sure to stay all the way through the end credits for two additional scenes: a mid-credit tease and a sly post-credits wrap-up complete with a gag.

6.1/10

"Machete don't tweet."

Although Robert Rodriguez has demonstrated the ability to produce sophisticated motion pictures (Sin City), he predominantly partakes in moviemaking for the sheer fun of it, essentially making goofy backyard productions for millions of dollars with his actor friends. As a result, there's a unique brand of zeal and enthusiasm to Rodriguez's action movies, as they feel like the work of a non-cynical director who's out to provide a fun time and push the boundaries of ridiculousness with tongue firmly planted in cheek. Luckily, all of these idiosyncrasies are present in 2013's Machete Kills, another affectionate throwback to the sleazy grindhouse exploitation pictures worshipped by Rodriguez. Retaining its predecessor's proclivity for ultraviolence and over-the-top action, and amplifying the insanity, it's a total blast, showing yet again that nobody does cheesy grindhouse-style cinema like Rodriguez.

Recruited by the President of the United States (Charlie Sheen), Machete Cortez (Danny Trejo) is sent to Mexico on a mission to assassinate Mexican drug lord Mendez (Demian Bichir). Mendez is determined to destroy Washington with a hijacked missile, but Machete cannot kill the madman, as the missile's countdown clock is connected to Mendez's heartbeat. Machete is therefore forced to transport Mendez back into America alive to defuse the bomb, but a bounty is soon offered for the heads of both men, forcing Machete to fight for his life. Upon realising that Mendez is only a patsy, Machete turns his attention to Luther Voz (Mel Gibson), a crazy weapons manufacturer who hopes to destroy the world and repopulate it with his race of superior beings.

To state the obvious, the Machete flicks are not built for Academy Awards consideration; instead, Rodriguez aspires to deliver dumb fun filled with action, gore and nudity for viewers who like this brand of cartoonish escapism. Once again, Rodriguez displays a magnificent sense of invention throughout the action set-pieces, with moments that often go beyond outright preposterous, but it's all pitched at the right tone. For crying out loud, on top of limbs being chopped up by boat engines and helicopter blades, there's even a "Swiss Army" machete and a bra worn by Sofía Vergara that shoots knives and bullets. Thankfully, the pacing is so brisk, and the material is so affectionately goofy that it's hard to hold any of this outlandishness against the flick since Rodriguez is just following through with what was promised on the tin.

Surprisingly, for what was ostensibly just another fun Robert Rodriguez action flick, the original Machete was instilled with a certain degree of depth and heart, making it feel more substantial than Rodriguez's typical output. Machete Kills is a bit more on the slight side, however, backgrounding the political grandstanding to allow Rodriguez to just cut loose and have fun. There are still messages, sure, but it's minor subtext; as a result, this is more of a dumb action film with a few things on its mind. The story of Machete Kills is completely scattershot, and it literally feels like the script was written on the fly, with Rodriguez and credited writer Kyle Ward likely coming up with goofy bits and pieces mere minutes before shooting. A considerable chunk of time is actually devoted to setting up the planned third movie in the series (Machete Kills Again...In Space), transitioning from a regular B-grade actioner into a campy Moonraker-inflected sci-fi adventure.

Machete Kills is frequently amusing, with Machete's blunt one-liners ("Machete don't smoke," "Machete don't fail"), the cornball characters (Mendez has multiple personality disorder, regularly switching between evil, good and neutral), in-jokes (Charlie Sheen is the President?!) and hilarious quirks to show how badass Machete truly is (while hanging from a noose, he just nonchalantly stares at his would-be killers, completely unaffected). Voz is even a self-proclaimed Star Wars fan, and the proposed third picture promises scenes of Trejo hacking up goons with a machete-shaped lightsaber. (Rodriguez, if you're reading, please follow through and complete the trilogy!) If there's anything to criticise about Machete Kills, it's that the narrative is perhaps a bit too dense, leading to a few dry spots during which momentum flags, and we've left yearning for the next big action scene. Added to this, Rodriguez leans a bit too heavily on obvious digital blood effects when practical squibs would be far more suitable for this type of throwback effort.

Machete is vehemently a joke character, an opportunity for Rodriguez to position aging character actor (and long-time friend) Danny Trejo as a lady-attracting, super-human action hero despite his wrinkled face and stony demeanour. Trejo does not let us know he's in on the joke, committing to the ludicrous material with utter sincerity, which is what makes the film work. But he's shown up by Gibson, a perfect pick for the role of Voz. Gibson is clearly loving it, relishing the chance to play his first real villain role. He hams it up to extremes, playing Voz in the most deliriously over-the-top manner imaginable. He's the movie's secret weapon, lightening up the mood and keeping Machete Kills compelling for every second of his screen-time. Gibson is so good, in fact, that it's a shame he's only relegated to the final third. Like the first film, there's a lot of stunt casting here, with the likes of Cuba Gooding Jr., Antonio Banderas, William Sadler and Vanessa Hudgens showing up, while Lady Gaga has such a small cameo appearance that it's possible she was just hastily written in so Rodriguez could advertise the fact that Lady Gaga is in the fucking movie. Sheen is also fantastic, nailing the requisite demeanour for this type of endeavour, while Vergara wholly commits to her colourful supporting role.

Machete Kills is undeniably messy and, at times, pretty sloppy, with haphazard plot points and an astonishingly incoherent narrative, but it's all watchable and fun, even if it cannot be defended from a serious critical standpoint. Those who enjoyed 2010's Machete should enjoy this follow-up as well, as it offers more of the same in terms of cheesy casting and insane action set-pieces, and the presence of Mel Gibson is a stroke of genius.

7.1/10

With DVD and Blu-ray discs being perceived as the norm for physical media in this day and age, and with media distribution gradually moving towards an all-digital delivery model, video cassettes have faded into obscurity, replaced with superior formats that have led to VHS being discontinued. But Rewind This! is not quite as dismissive towards the original home video format. Masterminded by Josh Johnson, this documentary concentrates on the collectors who take pride in their collection of VHS cassettes, hunting for obscure titles at flea markets and keeping their sense of nostalgia alive. But Rewind This! also offers far more than this, tracing the origins of VHS and examining both its cultural and historical impact, showing us how the media industry was changed forever with the ability to watch motion pictures at home.

Rewind This! introduces a number of eccentric VHS collectors who maintain an extensive library of video cassettes despite the advent of streaming, downloading and disc-based media. They treat their purchases like collectible baseball cards, treasuring obscure titles that will probably never be transferred to a more stable medium. A segment of the documentary even reveals some of the most cherished possessions of the collectors, from the ridiculous (Corey Haim's self-aggrandising video Me, Myself and I), the downright obscure (a Windows instructional video, starring Matthew Perry and Jennifer Aniston who play their Friends roles), the eccentric (Leslie Nielsen's Bad Golf Made Easier), and the fucking weird (Bubba Smith's workout video Until it Hurts, in which the hulking Smith says that he loves the viewer...). And to heighten the charm of the documentary, notable clips from some of these videos are shown.

While Johnson does not explain the mechanics behind VCRs, Rewind This! has a segment devoted to the genesis of VHS, recalling both its creation as well as its war against Betamax to become the dominant home video format. The overview of VHS's history is also interspersed with ancient ads for VHS and Betamax, including a very amusing commercial featuring John Cleese interacting with a cat. Other topics include pan and scan, introduced because consumers felt duped if they saw black bars on the top and bottom of the screen, oblivious that they were actually seeing the most visual detail possible because of it. Rewind This! also reminds us of a time before the internet, when consumers could only choose to watch films based on cover art, unable to check reviews on their smartphones. And because there was such a huge demand for VHS tapes in rental stores who wanted as many videos as possible, shelves were filled with the cheapest, most Z-grade titles imaginable (oftentimes shot on video), but said features still made bank thanks to their inventive box art. Indeed, these days we never see such ridiculously exciting video covers anymore.

Johnson additionally gauges opinions on the current state of media distribution. The documentary doesn't ignore the fact that a lot of people are simply not interested in a physical media collection, opting instead for streaming and downloading. One of the interviewees discusses the fact that the death of physical media will change the meaning of ownership forever because companies will wind up controlling a consumer's access to media. After all, even if one purchases a digital copy, it's possible for film companies to remotely lock access to it.

The biggest success of Rewind This! is the way it affectionately reminds us of the VHS era. While we can be thankful for modern advances in home media technology that allow us to watch movies in perfect quality in our own living rooms, one is forced to ponder a simpler time. Rewind This! shows that there is still a market for VHS tapes today, mirroring the fact that vinyl records are still a hot cult item. Quality is not important to the collectors, but rather the nostalgic factor, as well as the fact that hundreds of movies will only exist on VHS as they cannot be transferred to a superior format. Many casual movie-watchers completely neglect these facets, but Rewind This! provides fascinating food for thought, and the uninformed should find it completely enthralling.

Rewind This! is an energetic documentary, briskly delivered and full of information. Momentum does flag from time to time, but otherwise, there are very few missteps, and it manages to give each topic its due attention. It's a delightful piece of work that educates and evokes nostalgia, and it deserves to be seen by a wide audience.

8.2/10

"I don't steal from anyone who can't afford it, and I don't hurt anyone who doesn't deserve it."

To the untrained eye, 2013's Parker looks like just another Jason Statham vehicle; a completely unremarkable action fiesta that may as well have gone straight to video. In actuality, while the film delivers all the requisite elements associated with Statham's typical output, Parker is more of a revenge thriller - it's grittier and more grounded than the cartoonish Crank pictures, and more intense and gruffer than the Transporter trilogy. The plot trudges through familiar territory, but it benefits from the fine directorial touch of Taylor Hackford, who creates a smooth, slick ride; vehemently R-rated and frequently enjoyable. Parker is a bit of a mess that falls short of its potential, but it's never a deflating disappointment, as it moves at a decent pace and maintains an agreeable sense of cinematic escapism to make it a fun sit.

The titular Parker (Statham) is a career criminal who adheres to a strict moral code, choosing to rob only those who can afford it and never hurting innocent people in the process. Pulling off a heist at the Ohio State Fair with a group of thieves, Parker is screwed over for his cut of the money after refusing to take part in an impending jewel heist worth tens of millions of dollars. Parker is shot and left for dead by the no-good Melander (Michael Chiklis) and the rest of his gang, but, of course, Parker is not quite dead. Recovering from his wounds, he sets out to get revenge simply for the principal of it. Learning of Melander's next heist in West Palm Beach, Florida, Parker heads to the area hoping to thwart the plan, disguising himself as a wealthy Texan to avoid suspicion. Parker soon meets Leslie (Jennifer Lopez), a financially destitute real estate agent who manages to sniff out his game and demands to be cut in on the deal for a small slice of the take.

Written by John J. McLaughlin, Parker is an adaptation of Donald E. Westlake's book Flashfire, a constituent of the long-running series of Parker novels. Parker has appeared in films before, most notably in 1967's Point Blank and in the 1998 Mel Gibson actioner Payback. But while the same character appears in those films, he is not named Parker - indeed, this movie denotes the first time that the character has been properly named in cinema. McLaughlin's script briskly establishes the type of man that Parker is, with the introductory heist highlighting the titular character's desire to keep things peaceful (he even personally comforts a hysterical witness and reassures everyone that he's not interested in killing). The real essence of the Parker character is nailed here, which is a huge asset, and leaves us hoping for sequels (that will probably never happen). However, a few aspects of the narrative are short-changed. Most confusing is the character of Hurley (Nick Nolte), who ostensibly set up the initial fair heist but seems ignorant of the outcome. Narrative momentum also takes a nose dive once Leslie enters the film, as her character feels better suited for a romantic comedy than a hardboiled action-thriller.

Regardless of the storytelling flaws, Hackford's visual treatment of the material is close to perfect. An Oscar-nominated director, Hackford executes the picture with energy, finesse and mood, not to mention he embraces the R rating with open arms. Parker is the furthest thing from a sanitised PG-13 endeavour - rather, it's a viciously violent actioner with gory gunshot wounds and a handful of brutal hand-to-hand combat sequences. The centrepiece involves Parker brawling with a goon in a high-rise hotel room; the ensuing sequence is stunningly choreographed and technically flawless, especially the blood effects, which will make you cringe when a knife is impaled through Parker's hand. Parker was produced on a modest budget, and occasionally this is obvious, but for the most part, the movie looks attractive and skilfully-assembled, especially the heroically violent action set-pieces that genre fanatics will adore.

Like Sylvester Stallone and Arnold Schwarzenegger before him, Statham is the kind of action hero who makes any movie better with his distinct screen presence. Given a meaty role to chew on for once, Statham is a cool, deadly Parker, and he also seems to have a firm grasp on the character. It's a solid performance from the star whose brand of machismo and charm kept this reviewer engaged in his plight. Unfortunately, Lopez is less successful. She's not dreadful, but she doesn't shine as Leslie either, and one must wonder if a more competent actress could've done a better job and improved the overall quality of the movie as a result. The rest of the actors are solid, though. Nolte is his usual badass self, while Chiklis gives a believably menacing edge to his villainous role.

Parker had the potential to be an extremely interesting film noir masterpiece, but somewhere along the line, it transformed into more of a fun action flick with a few strokes of unique personality. It's definitely serviceable in this way thanks to some stunning set-pieces and competent craftsmanship, but more sophistication could have improved the finished product.

6.3/10

"Pray for the best, but prepare for the worst."

A refreshing change of pace following 2013's summer blockbuster season, Prisoners is an intense morality tale that plays out as a twisty police procedural thriller, exhibiting more sophistication and artistry than one would expect from a story like this. Helmed by Denis Villeneuve (making his Hollywood debut) and written by Aaron Guzikowski (Contraband), the film is multilayered and smart, proving to be an emotionally, mentally and philosophically fatiguing experience. While it seems like a straightforward whodunit on the surface, Prisoners is more concerned with the effects that a kidnapping case has on the picture's main players. The movie does clock in at almost two-and-a-half hours, but it earns every captivating frame.

To celebrate Thanksgiving, Keller (Hugh Jackman) and his wife Grace (Maria Bello) visit friends Franklin (Terrence Howard) and Nancy (Viola Davis), letting their respective children interact and play with one another. But not much attention is given to the youngest daughters of each of the families, who suddenly go missing after venturing outside without parental supervision. The case is assigned to Detective Loki (Jake Gyllenhaal), a seasoned, focused police investigator who has solved every crime that he has investigated. Arresting the mentally handicapped Alex Jones (Paul Dano) as a suspect, Loki unfortunately has no concrete evidence to keep the boy locked up. When Alex is released, Keller goes crazy, abducting the suspect to torture him for information in secret. As Loki persists with his investigation, Keller sees Alex as his only hope of getting the girls back, yet he might be wrong and time is fast running out.

There is not a trace of Hollywood artifice within any of the characters, as they all feel like realistic, fallible human beings. If another team of filmmakers told this story, Keller would unquestionably be the hero - a strong, smart, muscular presence who kicks ass and saves the girls. But Prisoners isn't like that, and this is no ego trip for Jackman. Deconstructing the invincible father figure seen in Taken and 24, Jackman's Keller is initially depicted in a sympathetic light but gradually transforms into a monstrous brute, and it's a huge achievement on the part of both Jackman and the screenplay that his voyage to the dark side is gripping and plausible. This is arguably Jackman's best performance to date, a nuanced and focused portrait of a broken man struggling to deal with his emotional grief. Likewise, Gyllenhaal rediscovers the gravitas and maturity we witnessed in End of Watch, turning in a credible performance that lets you forget that you're even looking at the actor. It's an immersive turn from Gyllenhaal, and he looks in tune with the material and his character at all times. Fortunately, the supporting cast could not be any better. Dano is especially chameleonic, disappearing into the role of Alex and effortlessly selling his character's mental disabilities. Melissa Leo, Maria Bello and Viola Davis provide solid support as well, while Terrence Howard submits his best work in years.

The pairing of director Villeneuve and cinematographer Roger Deakins (Skyfall, True Grit) was truly a match made in cinematic heaven, making for a visually striking thriller thick in atmosphere. Prisoners is set beneath the perpetually chilly, gloomy, often rainy skies of Pennsylvania, and the sense of place is immaculately established through Deakins' meticulous photography. He captures the texture of both the season-specific atmosphere and small-town milieu, and the composition and framing are genuinely breathtaking throughout. Furthermore, Villeneuve clearly knew that pacing is a major factor in the effectiveness of a mystery like this, and he acts appropriately - Prisoners lingers when it's suitable, and moves onto the next scene or plot point when the time feels right. The director excels at tension as well, assembling a handful of incredibly nail-biting scenes during which this reviewer felt wholly invested in the on-screen proceedings. The initial realisation that the girls are missing is heart-wrenching stuff, and it's hard to tear your eyes away from the screen during pivotal scenes later in the story. In lesser hands, Prisoners would be a low-rent, made-for-television affair, but it's a visual and aural masterpiece in the hands of this filmmaking team.

Astonishingly, the trailers for Prisoners held out on us, as they only shed light on the first third of the picture, establishing the basic set-up but refusing to show much more. It's wonderful to report that the full movie is darker and denser than expected, balancing the stories of the entire ensemble as the screenplay examines how the various characters deal with their grief. Although some viewers may solve the mystery before the big reveal happens, Prisoners doesn't live and die by its ability to surprise you. What matters the most here is the journey, and Villeneuve puts together an involving, emotionally gruelling thriller that never loses momentum despite its intimidating length. Unfortunately, the story's conclusion is not entirely successful, jettisoning the intelligence of the rest of the picture in favour of theatrics right out of an episode of a standard police procedural drama. It's not a deal-breaker, but a darker, tauter climax might've made for an overall superior product.

While aspects of the picture's climax are silly, the film's final scene cannot be criticised. It may be angering or disappointing to those expecting an ending that ties everything up neatly, but it's the perfect conclusion for those who enjoy having something to chew on and ponder once a film ends. Prisoners does commit a few sins, and it's probably not revolutionary enough to attract attention at the Oscars, but its flaws can be overlooked due to the impeccable filmmaking and the otherwise smart scripting. It's haunting and gripping viewing, with its thematic density and top-flight acting ensuring that it will not be easily forgotten.

8.3/10

"There are no real monsters."

One of three Stephen King adaptations to be released in 1983 (The Dead Zone and Christine being the other two), Cujo is a moderately thrilling though never outright terrifying horror about a man's best friend gone rabid. Most of King's stories concern supernatural threats, but Cujo is more grounded, boiling down to a simple story that could occur in the real world. It does work in the film's favour since it's stripped-down and intense, but it is a tad underwhelming on the whole; it doesn't have a great deal of staying power, and certain aspects of the production are certainly dated. Nevertheless, Cujo still has teeth and packs a punch, making for an entertaining enough '80s monster movie that has its moments.

The titular Cujo is a Saint Bernard dog who's bitten by a bat, which causes him to turn feral and develop into a bloodthirsty killer. Enter Donna Trenton (Dee Wallace), the wife of an advertising executive and the mother of precocious young boy Tad (Danny Pintauro). With her husband out of town for a few days on business, Donna's car begins sputtering, prompting her to take it to a local mechanic. Problem is, the mechanic is Cujo's owner, and when Donna shows up with Tad, the vicious dog is on patrol. Trapped in their broken-down car with nobody around except for the killer canine, Donna and Tad begin to realise that other dangers exist, with hunger, exhaustion and dehydration gradually setting in.

King wrote Cujo at the height of his alcoholism, and he reportedly cannot even remember writing the novel due to his severe drinking problem. Published in 1981, the book is often perceived as one of the author's darkest works due to its bleak ending that even King himself wishes he could change. Hence, the script for this adaptation (by Don Carlos Dunaway and Lauren Currier) concludes on a brighter note, a decision fully endorsed by King. The thrills of Cujo are slow to start - the first forty-five minutes are dedicated to build-up, developing the characters and laying the narrative foundation that will lead to Donna and Tad venturing into Cujo's hunting ground. The dramatic stuff is only moderately successful, making for a passable if unremarkable sit. Indeed, the characters have pretty perfunctory issues, with marriage infidelity even thrown into the mix, and you could be forgiven for just wanting the dog carnage to commence. To its credit, Cujo does have some interesting thematic undercurrents, with thoughtful allegories that some may not pick up on. However, none of this makes much impact, and it doesn't feel especially profound.

Veteran filmmaker Lewis Teague was personally selected by King to helm Cujo, as the author was impressed with the director's previous picture, Alligator. Teague's contributions are mostly fine, demonstrating a firm grasp of the art of cinematic tension, and the film benefits from sound cinematography courtesy of future director Jan de Bont. Cujo's reveal is especially terrific, as the scene is drenched in thick fog that sets an ominous mood. However, Cujo's special effects do not entirely hold up in the 21st century. The attack scenes are shot and edited in an effectively intense fashion, but Teague cannot quite sell the menace of this otherwise adorable Saint Bernard dog. Even though the effort is valiant, the attacks are never quite believable enough because the mutt never looks particularly vicious or dangerous when supposedly killing people.

Horror movies do not often give thespians the opportunity to prove themselves, but the acting here is rock-solid. Wallace and young Pintauro create a believable mother-son dynamic and manage to sell the terror with utmost skill. Once Wallace is trapped in her car, she really shows her range, showing realistic outbursts of emotion, horror and desperation. Meanwhile, Pintauro belies his age here, delivering an impressively natural performance. His reactions to Cujo's attacks are stomach-churning and rattling.

Cujo is a low-budget B-movie at its core, but it does show a degree of innovation in its technical construction and script, even if it does lack the substance of superior monster movies like Jaws and The Birds. The family drama is pedestrian, and some of the effects are dated, but a few thrilling sequences are peppered throughout, making Cujo a fun diversion. It's nothing spectacular, but it's a decent adaptation that does no disservice to King's novel.

6.2/10

"A wise man can learn more from his enemies than a fool from his friends."

Rush is arguably 2013's first genuinely great film. A gorgeously-mounted and compelling drama, it represents another winner from director Ron Howard, who's back in fine form here after 2011's The Dilemma. Howard's most distinguished movies are based on true stories, with Apollo 13 and Frost/Nixon showcasing the filmmaker's significant talents in terms of technical proficiency, bravura visuals and taut storytelling, and Rush further exemplifies this. Reuniting with Frost/Nixon screenwriter Peter Morgan, the picture turns its attention to the sport of Formula One racing in the 1970s, yet its appeal is not restricted to sports fans. Indeed, while fervent car fanatics and Formula One devotees will love the behind-the-scenes examination of this dangerous sport, newcomers are not left out in the cold. On the contrary, anyone who simply appreciates good filmmaking will enjoy Rush, as it offers far more than just racing action.

Set predominantly during the 1976 Formula One season, Rush concentrates on the rivalry between British racer James Hunt (Chris Hemsworth) and Austrian Niki Lauda (Daniel Brühl). The pair are complete polar opposites - Hunt is a hedonistic playboy who indulges in women and booze, while Lauda is a consummate professional who's 100% focused on the track, the epitome of all work and no play. As they enter the Formula One season of 1976, a heated contest breaks out between Hunt and Lauda, with Niki taking the lead early into the competition. Following a horrifying crash, Lauda is hospitalised with severe burns and injuries, allowing Hunt to gain some ground. But Lauda is unwilling to let his rival win the title so easily, charging through his rehabilitation and risking his well-being to return to the racetrack before the end of the season.

A less skilful motion picture would mould the story into a brainless racing fiesta, using Hunt as a hero and Lauda as a one-dimensional villain. But Morgan's screenplay is balanced, functioning as a character study of both men, observing their tempestuous relationship as they hesitantly develop a mutual, unspoken respect for one another. As a matter of fact, neither man is painted as a 'good' or 'bad' guy - both have appealing characteristics, but both have flaws that make them hard to like at times. It's a unique angle, and it luckily translates to captivating cinema in the hands of Howard and Morgan. You may find yourself rooting for one or the other, but you may also wind up rooting for both at the same time, leading to a nail-biting few minutes at the end when it's unclear if Hunt is the new World Champion or if Lauda will retain his title. Naturally, Morgan does alter or omit certain facets of the historical record for dramatic reasons (Lauda and Hunt were actually friends off the track in real life), but his script works, and that's what matters since this is a dramatisation rather than a documentary. If there's anything to criticise, it's that a few aspects of the narrative feel underdone - the first race of the 1976 Formula One season is summed up with a brief title card that feels jarring, and Hunt's marriage isn't given much attention.

Even Howard's lesser movies are well-made, and the filmmaker's talents are on full display here, with the director flawlessly realising Morgan's superlative script. Howard's astonishing command of the pacing and storytelling is commendable, as there's nary a dull moment throughout the feature's lengthy two-hour running time. Rush is an energetic film, but this is not to say that Howard skims through character development - on the contrary, large portions of time are devoted to dialogue and drama, but the scenes benefit from fine craftsmanship right down the line. Rush also springs to life during the racing sequences. The races were gorgeously filmed by cinematographer Anthony Dod Mantle (Dredd), the editing is faultless, and the use of sound is fantastic, making for immersive, atmospheric viewing. Plus, Howard doesn't baulk from showing the gruesome reality of Formula One racing, with Lauda's crash shown in unsettling detail. The make-up effects are seamless, and the production design exquisitely evokes the '70s without showing off.

Hemsworth is not an actor that one would expect to see in a role like this, as he's untested as a true thespian. But Hemsworth nails it, espousing an impressively consistent accent and embodying the essence of James Hunt. Believable as a booze-guzzling ladies' man, Hemsworth is ideal as the arrogant playboy, locating Hunt's humanity and even displaying the racer's emerging humility from time to time. Added to this, Hemsworth suitably resembles his real-life counterpart, which is underscored in a moving montage towards the film's end containing genuine documentary footage of the deceased Hunt. Meanwhile, Brühl was given the difficult task of playing Lauda, yet the resulting performance is extraordinary. Niki is a cold, determined man with unlikeable tendencies, yet Brühl humanises him, letting us believe his motivations and giving us the chance to sympathise with him. Rush is predominantly the Hemsworth and Brühl show, yet Howard assembles a top-flight supporting cast, too, including Olivia Wilde and Alexandra Maria Lara as the wives of the two racers.

Despite its Oscar pedigree, Rush is a mainstream-friendly flick, as Howard's touch is engaging, and the enormously stimulating racing sequences will keep casual movie-goers interested. Howard also deserves kudos for making this an R-rated adult fare, peppering the movie with realistic language and effective portrayals of racetrack harm. Rush could've gone the PG-13 route for maximum box office, but Howard sticks to his guns, and the result is a motion picture that feels like the work of a genuine auteur. While the film may prove somewhat entertaining for teenagers, this is vehemently a movie for adults who will appreciate the fine craftsmanship and the sense of cinematic maturity. And it's great to see this type of adult moviemaking sneaking its way into multiplexes after many months of fun but often brainless blockbusters.

9.0/10