Sympathy For Mr. Vengeance

Sympathy for Mr. Vengeance (Boksuneun Naui Geot) (2002)

Runtime: The version I saw was 121 minutes long

From: Park Chan-wook

Starring: Kang-ho Song, Ha-kyun Shin, Doona Bae, Ji-Eun Lim

From: CJ Entertainment

This is the end of my month of mainly watching foreign films. For the next 11 months I'll just sometimes watch them. Unfortunately I ended this on a negative note, and I am more surprised than anyone else I am not a fan of this like many others are. I explain why in the Letterboxd review below and I'll return tomorrow night.

I know, another rating and review that most will disagree with and some will even cry “blasphemer!” at me; I honestly don't believe it myself as most of the movies I see from South Korea I dig, I've heard so many good things about the director and the plot-while dark-did sound interesting in an oddball way. Unfortunately, aside from some moments this was just something that I rejected and this ends my month of foreign movie watching (at least, I watched them more often this month than I usually do; I still watch a decent amount the other 11 months) on a down note, something I was not expecting at all.

I've seen some downbeat stories in my life (the one South Korean example I can list is The Chaser) but this, this just wore me down with the ugly and quite frankly preposterous story, the repellent characters, and how bleak everything was. I didn't get too much entertainment value out of this, sadly. I guess I should have had different expectations with a story revolving around a deaf mute man with green/blue hair, a sister who needs a kidney transplant, a quite frankly preposterous set of circumstances which includes a black market selling of body organs and kidnapping a little girl... it got even more ridiculous and unpleasant from there. Those things aren't necessarily a deterrent to me but when there's nothing for me to latch onto (like a great/memorable character, at least one incredible performance or gleefully dark moments) then that will be a problem for me.

I can say I laughed at some absurd moments (which I won't spoil) but the overall story and such things as the girlfriend of the deaf mute lead being a loathsome broad stroke caricature stereotype of what “a young revolutionary person” is supposed to be... one of many turn-offs this movie provided. At least it was filmed and put together well... what I know of the other films of “The Vengeance Trilogy” of director Chan-wook Park, I think I'll put off watching them for at least some time because of the possibility I could react even worse to those sacred cows than I did this prized cattle which I just slaughtered.

At least there are still plenty of Korean films out there for me to watch, ones I am sure are more up my alley and to my peculiar tastes than what I saw last night.

My Digestive System...

got in the way of me watching something last night. I just did not feel well. Wrestlemania is tonight so I'll be watching that. I may rewatch something for Letterboxd after that and talk about it there on Monday. No matter what I'll return to this site Tuesday night with... something or another.

Run All Night

Run All Night (2015)

60% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 131 reviews)

Runtime: 114 minutes

Directed by: Jaume Collet-Serra

Starring: Liam Neeson, Joel Kinnaman, Ed Harris, Boyd Holbrook, Vincent D'Onofrio

From: Warner Brothers

Yesterday afternoon I went to the local cineplex to see a recent theatrical release. It happened to be this one, a movie that hasn't done well at the box office but alas... the Letterboxd review is below and I'll return Sunday afternoon.

I'll be honest and say that I haven't seen the previous efforts between Liam Neeson and director Jaume Collet-Serra (Unknown and Non-Stop; I've heard real mixed things about both) but I decided to check this out, due to the cast and the plot sounding “serious” with some action and between that, the good buzz and the great posters, and I was sold... even with the bad box office.

The movie was more serious than I expected; “sour”, “downbeat”, and “unpleasant” are also terms I can use in this story of Irish ex mob enforcer Jimmy Conlin (Neeson) who is a broken down old drunk. He used to work for boss Shawn Maguire (Ed Harris). Their sons meet each other again under unfortunate circumstances; while Maguire's son Danny is a drug-abusing punk who causes a lot of problems, Conlin's son Mike trains at-risk kids in boxing at a small gym. Bad things happen and Shawn is looking for revenge, so Jimmy has to help out his son, but Mike hates his dad for the life he had and all those people he killed. Will they get along and come to more of an understanding of each other?

I have a feeling this review will come off as more negative than I want to; after all I am rating this as 3 out of 5 stars. It's just that I've seen some strong reviews for it and I can't quite feel the same way. I definitely have no issues with darker stories or those where most of the characters are pretty bad people. It's just that with me personally all the negativity, dourness, and anger started to wear me down. Also, this is uneven, with some one dimensional characters and story issues (did we really need to see part of the finale at the beginning? In this case, no).

Yet, I still say that this was fine as the general idea of this taking place in a 24 hour period is cool, New York City in the evening hours looked pretty cool, there were memorable bits and the best moments were when old veterans Neeson and Harris interacted with each other. The score from Junkie XL was pretty rad too. Maybe my expectations were too high but at least I did not hate this. If only the action stuff would have been filmed in a clearer manner... at least I was able to laugh at hearing one of the most popular songs from the band Dope get used in a big 2015 film.

As some people out there got pretty upset that a surprise unbilled cameo in this was spoiled by certain reviewers, I know not to do it myself, except to explain that there's a small role in this from a famous actor and while I wouldn't have minded a larger role for someone of their talents, I was greatly amused by the way they looked here. But in my eyes, among the director's work that I've seen I clearly prefer the zany Orphan to this.

Mandrill

Mandrill (2009)

Runtime: 90 minutes

Directed by: Ernesto Diaz Espinoza

Starring: Marko Zaror, Celine Reymond, Alejandro Castillo, Luis Alarcon

From: I am not going to try to list the dozen or more companies (!) that were listed in the opening credits

This is a film from Chile I saw for a few reasons, including it expiring on Instant in a few days. If only it wasn't so average... it has a wacky endorsement of Schick Razors but this definitely isn't as good as the 70's funk band known as Mandrill. The Letterboxd review is below and I'll return tomorrow night.

While I am not officially participating in the month-long reviewing of foreign films, I figured I should still meet one of the demands that those officially doing it had to fulfill, which is that one of the movies had to be from Chile. I realize this isn't a high brow movie from there, but I have seen some films from star Marko Zaror (I haven't reviewed them all here; the reason why his only high profile role is the wildly uneven Machete Kills is that I understand Zaror prefers doing his own projects, which do have trouble getting off the ground) and a few days from now it will expire from Netflix Instant, so this was the perfect time to see it.

Turns out, this movie is totally average in every way. Just listen to the plot description: A hitman gets revenge on the villain who killed his parents when he was a kid. Why this didn't happen sooner, I can't say, but he finally does it now... only to fall in love with the villain's attractive daughter. The movie is as generic as it sounds. Now, there's some entertaining action scenes (even with too much CGI) and there's some colorful touches.

Those touches include there being a whole crew of hitmen all known as Mandrill. One of them is named Uncle Chone and he has to teach a protege how to be successful at the job; that's pretty much being like John Colt. Who's that, you ask? Why, that's the movie within the movie which is a wacky 70's spoof James Bond/martial arts thing.

While he's not John Wick, I think I would have preferred an entire John Colt film rather than this, where there are many different tones and there are many different elements (spy spoof, serious drama, action, exploitation, etc.) but it doesn't come together that successfully. I can still rate it as average due to the action and how the lead girl-Celine Reymond-does a swell job as the lead girl, but I was hoping for more and if you want to see Zaror in action, you should check out Undisputed III instead.

Luna Papa

Luna Papa (1999)

Runtime: 107 minutes

Directed by: Bakhtyar Khudojnazarov

Starring: Chulpan Khamatova, Moritz Bleibtreu, Ato Mukhamedzhanov, Merab Ninidze

From: Many different companies

This is way different from me. This movie is listed as being from EIGHT different countries on the IMDb: Tajikistan, Germany, Japan, Austria, Switzerland, France, Russia, and Uzbekistan. As it was filmed in and the director is from Tajikistan, that's why I listed it first and consider it its main country of origin. It's online on YouTube in a subbed version so I was interested in seeing something from a country that even I couldn't locate specifically on a map. It's not like the person on Letterboxd I follow who has seen films this month from places like Haiti, Nepal, and Samoa, but I am happy with the variety I've seen this month, even if I was disappointed with a film or two.

The Letterboxd review is below and I'll return tomorrow afternoon.

Yes, I am reviewing a film that IMDb lists as from being 8 different countries. However, as the director is from and it was filmed in Tajikistan, that's why I listed it first. I will be honest and admit that before today even I could not have found the country on a map; I knew the general location but those former Soviet Union areas that became their own country are a little fuzzy to me. Anyhow, I was definitely interested in seeing a film from such an obscure place.

The plot: We follow a teenage girl-Mamlakat-who has a father (but no mother) and has to take care of an older brother named Nasreddin who at first I was worried about as he came off like a Simple Jack mentally handicapped person who was always that way. Turns out, he was a soldier but a lane mine almost killed him and did obvious brain damage, so... it's not as cringe-worthy as I first feared. Mamlakat is interested in acting and she happens to meet one from a traveling troupe. That dude says he knows TOM CRUISE (really) and she falls for it, and becomes pregnant. Note that they “did it” outside in the dark so she doesn't even know his identity. The trio attempt to find that actor (as the father of the unborn child being unknown is a shameful thing), and wackiness ensues.

Me, I was most interested in seeing what Tajikistan looked like, its customs, music, etc. As I know so little about the place, that seemed most appropriate. Well, it looks like an interesting country. It looks like a lot of desert with some mountains but the music was different and there are such customs as people on a random small boat finding the protagonists stuck on a bridge due to vehicle trouble and the guys on the boat sell them some clothes. That I understand; why you see some women dressed up like fruit and dancing in random buildings amongst random people... that I cannot explain!

That's not the only odd moment in this daffy comedy-drama which has its share of surrealistic moments, especially the ending. Also, the movie demonstrates that the country at this time still had a bunch of cars that looked decades old driving about, and there were rebel forces that you saw cause trouble; I understand that was true to life at the time in the country.

The dad being a controlling angry person isn't my favorite stereotype but I tried to ignore that (admittedly he wasn't always like that and despite some frustration Mamlakat does care about her brother) and I was amused-and bemused-by this movie, for the most part. Surrealistic movies aren't always my bag but overall I can rate this as 3 stars and will try to learn more about that area in general so I am not so ignorant about it.

Twenty Years Of African Cinema

Twenty Years of African Cinema (Camera d'Afrique) (1983)

Runtime: 94 minutes

Directed by: Ferid Boughedir

Starring: This is a documentary

From: Several different companies

Note that this will be a long review, but there's a reason for that. I watched something pretty obscure on Netflix Instant and it's a documentary about the early days of African cinema, from Tunisia and France; I am a nerd so of course I would want to see it, especially considering my knowledge of that beforehand was quite limited. Yes I did enjoy it. The Letterboxd review is below and I will return Wednesday night.

This is something different from me: a documentary from Tunisia and France about early African cinema; earlier in the month in another review I admitted I knew precious little about the movies from that continent and I should try to rectify that. When I found this, it seemed perfect to me; Tunisian director Ferid Boughedir compiled clips from various films all across Africa, interviewed various directors and presented a history of film on that continent. It's on Netflix Instant and by all appearances precious few have seen it I figured so I thought it was worth a shot.

It proved to be a worthwhile experience, as besides the various clips you see of films that at least in America are impossible to find even for purchase on disc or viewing via any sort of streaming, the history of films there was also quite interesting; the early directors had many struggles and tried their best, even without the support of their governments and trying to fight against the companies that distributed foreign films there... and said foreign films were often cheap pieces of crap. It was only by the time that this documentary came out that through the efforts of the directors themselves and the increased acceptance of the governments had the movie scene there seen become better regarded.

I really don't know what's happened between then and now when it comes to African cinema and that is quite unfortunate how much of it is still obscure to even film fans and like I said most of it is quite difficult to track down. Maybe one day it'll change; for now I enjoyed learning all that history and seeing those figures get some attention and praise to what certainly looks like a unique scene. I just wish I knew about people like Ousmane Sembene, Med Hondo or Souleymane Cisse, or especially the two female directors they interviewed (Fadika Kramo Lacine & Safi Faye) and what it's like to work in a young industry while dealing with the unfortunate biases that occur due to someone's gender. That said, if you ever wanted to learn more about this topic then this is a must-see.

Below is a list of the film clips they showed. Note that the dates I provide are basically my best guess from looking them up, as the movie and sometimes even IMDb isn't always accurate.

1974's Les “Bicots-Negres” Vos Voisins, directed by Med Hondo and from Mauritania and France: I have no idea what Voisins is actually about, except that it's apparently over 3 hours long and the English title is, ahem, “Arabs and N-----s, Your Friends”. I am not going to type out that full word so I did some self-editing. It does at least provide the introduction for this documentary. It's a random dude speaking for a few minutes about how he knows that “the West” invented everything about filmmaking and how “the whites” came to Africa and they were the ones to build theatres to show the movies from elsewhere. I have no trouble believing that is actually what happened.

After the opening titles the rest of this is narrated in English, alongside the film clips in their native languages.

1963's Borom Serret, from Senegal and directed by famed director Ousmane Sembene: The importance of an authentic voice from the continent and how it accurately portrays life there is mentioned. The clip shown from this 20 minute short of a man with a horse getting his cart seized for unfair reasons and how he's going to survive.

1966's Black Girl, also from Mr. Sembene and this time from Senegal and France: It's a tale about a native woman who is a maid in Senegal but when they move to France she is suddenly mistreated and well, her reaction to all of this is on the gruesome side; sadly it's said to be based on a true story.

1969's Oh Sun, another film directed by Med Hondo and from Mauritania and France: It's another tale of racism in France as a man moves there trying to improve his life but he experiences a different sort of hardship.

1973's Saitane, from Niger/France and directed by Oumarou Ganda: The title is translated to “Satan”, so that says a lot. The movie is about how a sorcerer is like the devil as he manipulates everyone around him. Among the footage shown is a chicken getting its head cut off. You've been warned.

1972's Amanie, a half hour short from the Ivory Coast and directed by Roger Gnoan M'Bala: It was described as being “against extreme Westernization” and the footage shown reflects that, and how some people do need to stay in the country so they could-for example-continue being farmers.

1977's Ceddo, another from Ousmane Sembene: It's about a village trying to avoid being converted by outsiders throughout several centuries.

1973's Touki Bouki, from Senegal/France and directed by Djibril Diop Mambety: I reviewed it earlier in the month and it did not work for me. I realize it's a minority opinion so you may feel differently than I.

1975's Muna Moto, directed by Jean-Pierre Dikongue Pipa, from Cameroon; it's a love story, like Romeo & Juliet, but that's simplifying it, as it's really about dowrys and arranged marriages.

1975's News from the Village, from female director Safi Faye and Senegal, it is about life in her country and a protest against the government.

1975's Xala, against from Ousmane Sembene, the story of a polygamous politician's sudden impotence is satire relating to the bourgeoisie of the country.

1978's Barra, from Mali and director Souleymane Cisse, it's a protest against conditions in the country and how many are mistreated, especially while working.

1980's The Chapel, from what is known now as the Republic of the Congo and Jean-Michel Tchissoukou: I could not find a plot description but from the title and what was shown, religion and the forced Christian beliefs from outsiders seems to be the point

1980's The Exile, another film from Oumarou Ganda: It's based on an old African tale and is about honor and the power of the spoken word.

1976's Ajani Ogun, from Nigeria and director Ola Balogun: It's about a young hunter who has to deal with a corrupt politician.

1981's Djeli, from the Ivory Coast and director Fadika Kramo Lacine: It's about the caste system in Africa and its issues.

1982's Wend Kuuni, from what is now Burkina Faso and Gaston Kabore is a tale about an abandoned young child found then adopted.

1981's Fenye, again from Mali and director Souleymane Cisse, it's about a student revolt against the oppressive regime.

Wyrmwood: Road Of The Dead

Wyrmwood:Road of the Dead (2014)

Runtime: 98 minutes

Directed by: Kiah Roache-Turner

Starring: Jay Gallagher, Bianca Bradley, Leon Burchill, Luke McKenzie, Yure Covich

From: Guerilla Films

This is another film I've seen at Enzian, having gone there to see it late last night. At least the audience experience there was better than my last two times at that theatre. As for this Australian horror/comedy... the Letterboxd review is below and I'll return Monday night.

I figured it was about time I experienced the Ozploitation scene of Australia and this movie is but one example of how the country still makes the sort of genre fare that gave it a good reputation back in the 70's and 80's. I was able to see this “zombie film” on the big screen; now, I think that genre is WAY played out by now but I was hoping I would enjoy this low budget thing, which I understand took 4 years to film as they only worked on it during weekends.

I've seen plenty of strong reviews for it. I wish I could say the same, but 3 stars is the highest I can give it. To start things off, this is “a zombie film” as much as, say, Nightmare City or Planet Terror. It's actually an event which I won't spoil-but is charming in how it's a plot device straight out of a 70's or 80's horror film-which causes many people to go mad and the reason why some aren't infected is also cute in being old school. These infected people move pretty fast so that's why I compared it to Nightmare City.

There's pathos to go along with the bloody action and there's a good amount of comedy, albeit on the crude side. It at least made me laugh and the funniest person was the Aboriginie character Benny. I don't know too much about the history between the white settlers of Australia and the true natives, but I presume it's like the United States between those white settlers and Native Americans so it was nice to see the indigenous people of that country get represented. Anyhow, thavis is how some mates come together and try to avoid getting killed and they spend a lot of time in the outback.

My main issue is that this is another case of a movie trying way too hard. To me they try so hard to be “a new cult hit” when I believe that many of those in the past weren't really trying to be that and it just naturally happened... they were trying so hard it seemed forced too often and there's one supporting character in particular who is so over the top and goofy I groaned whenever they appeared, which thankfully wasn't too often. Also, I understand with the budget and all that there's plenty of digital blood and digital squib shots but at least in a theatre it looked rather fake and some other effects shots were just bad. That's not even getting into the story issues or how there's plenty of contrivances.

I understand why some rate it high but due to what I mentioned, 3 stars is as high as I can realistically go... even if it tries to do something different among familiar trappings.

The Blue Jean Monster

The Blue Jean Monster (Jeuk Ngau Jai Foo Dik Jung Kwai) (1991)

Runtime: The version I saw was 91 minutes long

Directed by: Kai-Ming Lai

Starring: Fui-On Shing, Siu Fong Wong, Gloria Yip, Amy Yip

From: Golden Harvest

Yes, this is a real movie and no it's not a porno. Rather, it's a Hong Kong film-from a major studio at that-I was told about on a messageboard in the past, but I explain all that and how strange this is below in my Letterboxd review, and I'll return tomorrow night.

About two years ago in a messageboard thread about movies someone (a big Asian movie watcher) mentioned some of the odd films he has seen before, including this one. For what should be obvious reasons, me and several others snickered at the title. Then, once we found out what this Category III (the strongest rating a Hong Kong release can receive) movie was all about, probably all of us were surprised and amused. I was able to find a copy so that is what I watched last night.

Basically, think of this as an even weirder version of Dead Heat! Yes, the motion picture with Treat Williams, Joe Piscopo and Vincent Price. One day I'll watch that for review here, but The Blue Jean Monster is about a cop named Tsu who has a pregnant wife soon to give birth; they don't always get along, due in part to their lack of sex life. I'll just say that they don't have an enlightened view of sexual intercourse during pregnancy. Tsu has a buddy-known as Power Steering-who is physically handicapped and he's an annoying goof; then again there are several grating characters in this motion picture.

Anyhow, he tries to break up a robbery but is killed when a lot of metal crap is dropped on him. Due to electricity and-ahem-CAT URINE, he is revived as a member of the living dead and he has to try to hide his undeadness and his gaping wounds that he attempts to stop with such things as a sanitary pad.

This movie is rather uneven, with there being a good amount of comedy, a lot of time being spent on the marriage of Tsu, those annoying characters and there's some wild shifts in tone. But, despite it being rather juvenile at times and also crude (there's a subplot involving Tsu and Power Steering and the mistaken belief that they have a homosexual relationship with each other; it should be no surprise that this isn't too enlightened either), I usually did laugh and it was mainly due to me finding the humor to be funny; it wasn't really me laughing AT the film. It's just so goofy and silly and yet there's some nice action and even a bit of horror so it's wacky and more often than not I was amused.

Considering that the film (at least in the subbed version I watched) also has characters with such names as Etc, Gucci and Death Rays-played by Amy Yip!-I didn't take this seriously, which helped in me enjoying this daffy piece of work.

Off Topic, But Some Computer Advice

I was going to have a review up now, but last night, my laptop experienced issues so I needed to spend that time fixing it. 

Something nasty ended up there; I use AVG and Malwarebytes Anti-Malware and that combo usually does the trick but this time I needed to use RKill (to stop the processes themselves so I would be able to get rid of them) then Adwcleaner and after I ran those two I ran AVG and Malwarebytes and that did the trick, but I wasn't happy about wasting time with that. At least I told you guys what you should use in the future.

Barring another catastrophe between now and then, tomorrow night is when I'll be back with a review.

Kingsman: The Secret Service

Kingsman: The Secret Service (2015)

74% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 179 reviews)

Runtime: 129 minutes

Directed by: Matthew Vaughn

Starring: Colin Firth, Taron Egerton, Samuel L. Jackson, Mark Strong, Michael Caine

From: 20th Century Fox

Here's yet another controversial review; yes, I did not like this movie either. I will explain why below in a lengthy review from Letterboxd. Note that I posted that review late last night. I will return Thursday night, as I need to do some online things between now and then.

Me posting a review this late (real late at night, United States Eastern Standard Time) is an extraordinarily rare occurrence. Yet, I have to do it to get my opinions out of my head and out into the world, that a movie most of the world loves not only left me cold, but actually caused me to HATE it.

Now, I never have reviewed it for the site but I've seen Kick-Ass once and I'd rather not actually watch it again. I thought it was a stupid film and not that entertaining at all, so I'd give it a pretty low grade. Despite the same director and same (hack) comic book writer coming together again to adapt some other comic book I never heard of before, with all the incredible praise I've heard about it here and elsewhere and how I enjoy watching the Bond films (and eventually I'll finish reviewing all of them), I thought there's no way I would dislike this, right?

Well, I was wrong. Let me explain.

You want to talk about a movie that's trying WAY WAY too hard at all times, it's this. It's not always the case but it seems like that's more often than not a turn-off for me, and here they were trying to be SO “edgy”, “cool”, “hip”, “stylishly violent” or what have you. It just wore thin and I really didn't enjoy watching this. I thought the story was stupid and sucked and made zero sense; what was going to happen once the villain's ridiculous impossible plan would have been successful? I thought Samuel L. Jackson as the incredibly casual billionaire villain was just dumb (is him eating McDonalds with a distinguished guest supposed to be funny?) and the lisp was just pointless and distracting. I thought most of the characters were complete A-holes and absolutely abrasive (and needlessly so), and I certainly did not like the main character Eggsy. What a sh*thead he was! Colin Firth as an action hero is amusing at all, but otherwise... that one woman whose name I don't remember and don't care to remember who has blades for legs that she uses as weapons: stupid. I thought the action scenes were incoherent and badly shot. Yes, even “that one scene” most orgasm over. And talk about lazy blunt unimaginative "satire" of old spy films.

Honestly, the more I think about this the more I hate it and the drunk tool fratboy backwards hat wearing energy drink pounding meathead bro vibe that leaves a stench on the entire thing. I'll leave it at 1 ½ stars but by this point I may be generous with how I am feeling. The interaction between Eggsy and a certain female character: just gross all around. I'll just presume that Mark Millar is just as much of a lowlife and child minded as Frank Miller is, especially when it comes to females. I certainly know that I'll never see a film ever again involving Mark Millar or Matthew Vaughn, and those two together, why it's like toxic waste.

I can't quite explain why most films made in modern years (including and especially many beloved ones) just leave me cold, but they do. I'd much rather watch even the worst Bond movies than this ugly hateful unpleasant garbage ever again. Why most of the world loves this, I cannot comprehend. No offense to all those following me that love the film; I just don't see it at all, all the alleged joy and mirth you've gotten out of this.

Now, if you don't want SPOILERS then stop reading here. I'll just mention some things which particularly bothered me.

With that out of the way, the entire final act just rubbed me the wrong way, between the grossness of Eggsy and that princess, the nonsense of the plot itself, the cheapness of the movie threatening a mother killing her toddler child, and whatever the “humor” was of all those heads exploding and it being represented by... fireworks and smoke? WTF? That was just awful.

But what REALLY made me turn against the movie: the whole subplot with the dogs. Now, I don't think the killing of the puppy in John Wick was really needed, at least there was a point to it, that it was something else taken away from Wick at an awful time in his life so that's why he snaps and kills all those sons of bitches.

Here, it's just awful screenwriting that I actually saw through the entire time and I knew what would happen as soon as it was first introduced. That alone isn't bad, but it trying to be “cheap heat” by being “edgy” in threatening to kill cute dogs... that was just disgusting and absolutely not needed at all and there were much better ways to have a plot element where Eggsy fails in the final test, only of course to be accepted later on. It's just ugliness and unpleasantness brought into it and honestly, f*ck you Matthew Vaughn and f*ck you Mark Millar for that moment which almost legit caused me to walk out of the auditorium and go home. What D-bags you are for even thinking such a thing had to be done.

Sports On The Big Screen Are Still Neat

I won't get into the reasons why my plans changed last night but they did so instead of watching a film on Saturday, I watched UFC 185 on the big screen and it was a quality show so I am glad I did. I won't be back until Tuesday night where I'll have a review up.

Srigala

Srigala (1981)

Runtime: The version I saw was 86 minutes long

Directed by: Sisworo Gautama Putra

Starring: Dorman Borisman, Lydia Kandou, Barry Prima, Rudy Salam

From: Rapi Films

Here's something wacky from me: until yesterday afternoon I had no idea this movie was even a thing. But, on a website I discovered that there was an Indonesian version of Friday the 13th and I found that to be pretty funny so I knew I had to watch it last night. The review from Letterboxd is below and I'll return tomorrow night.

Yesterday afternoon I was on a site and discovered the existence of this film (I understand the title means "The Fox"), described as an Indonesian knockoff of Friday the 13th; what better time than last night to watch it? It's not hard to find a copy of it online to watch; there's just two problems: it looks to be a blown up 1:85 version of a 2:35 print... and there's no copy with English sub or dubbing. Still, I watched it, even without knowing a word of Indonesian. I had a feeling that dialogue would not be so important in a motion picture such as this.

The last half hour or so are a pretty blatant copy of Friday the 13th, down to a middle aged woman appearing and at first looking like a friendly but then exposing herself as the lead villain, and the shock ending... only this time it's an adult corpse popping out of the water; you see, there's no Jason Voorhees here. This is about a trio of treasure hunters who are trying to find loot at the bottom of the lake and there are two young women and a young dude who show up to camp and the two groups hang out with each other, sometimes uneasily. The reason why Indonesian Pamela Voorhees starts killing people relates to her not wanting people to take the treasure, at least according to text I found then translated through Google Translate. And that adult corpse was actually seen earlier so it was not like it suddenly popped up out of nowhere.

I admit that I would love to see this again but with it being subbed or dubbed so I can be more sure this rating is accurate. I also would like to be sure the version I saw wasn't edited to take out some gore/violence as there isn't too much of that present aside from the ending. As is, I have to say this is about average. It didn't appear to be awful but it's not great either; in addition, the presence of wackiness/oddness would tickle me pink, but the only examples of that were a random speedboat chase and a random martial arts fight between the two young women. I was almost expecting more strangeness and inexplicable moments but alas...

That said, I am still amused there's such a thing as a Friday the 13th inspired movie from Indonesia where it isn't an exact clone and they tried to put their own spin on it.

Intrepidos Punks

Intrepidos Punks (1980)

Runtime: The version I saw was 87 minutes long

Directed by: Francisco Guerrero

Starring: Juan Valentin, Juan Gallardo, Ana Luisa Peluffo, the greatly named Princesa Lea

From: Some Mexican company

This is a review a long time coming, as for years now I've known of this film, a cult favorite in some circles. It's been on YouTube with subs for awhile now, and with this month being me watching all sorts of foreign films, this was the right time for it. The Letterboxd review is below; what a wacky film I saw and when I return tomorrow afternoon I'll be reviewing something else I am predicting will be wacky.

For awhile now I've known of this infamous movie from Mexico, made in 1980 but not released for 8 years, likely due to how sleazy and trashy it is. From mere description it sounded insane and yet I put off watching it. Well, last night was the time, mainly due to this month of reviewing foreign films, and I am rating this more on entertainment value than filmmaking quality-the low budget is readily apparent.

There isn't too much of a plot: a group of biker punks that look like they came from the set of The Road Warrior raise a lot of hell: some of the female members rob a bank while dressed like nuns, they bust their leader TARZAN (an actual Mexican wrestler known as El Fantasma, which is why his face is never seen and he wears a wacky mask) out of jail, they steal a tanker truck full of gas, light a man on fire, etc. They also do a lot of dancing and partying and general debauchery.

Out to get them are two middle-aged mustached federal agents, one of them sort of looking like a Mexican Joe Spinell. After some other busts that only tangentially at best are related to the main story, they go after the punks. This is the sort of film where:

* The punks have names like Spider, Pirate and Caligula
* The punks themselves are all amazing-looking people with the way they dress, the makeup they have on and their hair
* The opening credits are spraypainted on the side of a building
* To steal a thought, one of them looks like Seann William Scott, and besides throwing ninja stars, the highlight of Mexican Steve Stifler is when you see his face as he, ahem, masturbates then releases. They are astounding
* Unfortunately, there's a gang rape scene and I could have done without that
* But fortunately, Tarzan uses some lucha libre moves, such as a bodyslam and even a tombstone piledriver
* Getting hit in the balls actually does produce a realistic reaction
* The score is either punk or groovy rock music; expect to hear parts of the title song at least a dozen times

This film certainly isn't for everyone but for the percentage of those on Letterboxd that enjoy watching trash cinema, this is a must-see.

Yep, More Remakes, Reboots & Sequels

No movie review tonight (that'll come when I return tomorrow night); instead I want to do a short entry where I once again say that this trend of remakes, reboots and sequels in Hollywood & television is going to get worse before it gets better and it's just sad at this point.

I mean, Cabin Fever (from '02!) is getting remade, there's going to be a Leatherface prequel film where he's a young pretty dude, Tron 3 is going to happen (I really hope it's better than Legacy) and just moments ago I heard that they want to do a new Naked Gun... but have it NOT be a spoof movie! I swear this is true. Lord what a stupid idea; besides doing it without Leslie Nielsen, it being a different genre is asinine on so many levels I don't even know where to begin. No wonder why I ignore many Hollywood movies from recent times and prefer foreign films (old and new) and movies from the past. Sigh, talk about depressing.

At least my next review will be of a foreign movie from the past.

The Cabinet Of Dr. Caligari

The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari (Das Cabinet Des Dr. Caligari) (1920)

Runtime: 77 minutes

Directed by: Robert Wiene

Starring: Werner Krauss, Conrad Veidt, Friedrich Feher, the greatly named Lil Dagover and Hans Heinrich von Twardowski

From: Decla-Bioscop AG

Here's something unusual for me, a silent film, and this is one said to be the very first horror movie. It still works in 2015 even without a word of audible dialogue. The way it's filmed and how shadow and light are also used... there's a reason why this is something for the serious film fan. The Letterboxd review is below and I'll return tomorrow night.

As I've stated before I haven't watched nearly the amount of silent movies that I really should have. I figured I should do that today and one that is foreign by checking out this legendary motion picture from Germany, said to be the first ever in the horror genre and probably also the first one to have a twist ending.

The plot: two people are talking to each other on a park bench and one tells the other the story of the recent ordeal they experienced. In a small German town, a carnival is about to start and the titular doctor shows up with his act. Just one look at his appearance and his bizarre hairstyle, you know he has to be evil! Anyhow, the act is that he controls a somnambulist, which is normally a sleepwalker but in this case is pretty much an undead person who sleeps in a coffin and can see into the future. People suddenly are killed; the first one deserved it because he was an A-hole but the others, all innocent people. Is it Cesare-the sleepwalker-who is behind it?

I don't want to give too much away to those that haven't seen this famous film before, but let me note that it's still effectively creepy even 95 years later. The score that's attached to the version on Netflix Instant works for what you see, being mellow when it needs to be and chilling when the creepy stuff starts happening. Also, the sets and backdrops... this is pretty much a staged play as there are built sets and hand painted backdrops throughout. It's all angular and odd but also pretty awesome, further adding to the surreal nature of it all.

As for the twist ending, I say it works and isn't one of those eye-rolling or anger-inducing M. Night Shyamalan sort of stupid needless twists. I thought it was actually effective and added to the tale. Whether or not you've seen it already, you should watch it again then look at sights like Wikipedia to read about all the subtext and how the characters represent such things as the German government and its citizens that blindly follow it no matter what; it's all quite interesting and this is a motion picture to watch for all serious film fans.

What We Do In The Shadows

What We Do in the Shadows (2014)

95% on Rotten Tomatoes (out of 111 reviews)

Runtime: 86 minutes

Directed by: Jemaine Clement/Taika Waititi

Starring: Jemaine Clement, Taika Waititi, Jonathan Brugh, Cori Gonzalez-Macuer, Stuart Rutherford

From: Several companies, including apparently Funny or Die, of all people

For the first time in months I returned to the arthouse joint in Orlando known as Enzian. The last time I had a bad audience experience; now, they even tell people not to be A-holes but of course there were some A-holes around. That makes me sad that sort of behavior is now common at such a place. A regular theatre is one thing, but an arthouse joint? Sigh... that said, this movie is still great. The Letterboxd review is below and I'll be back tomorrow night.

Last night before I left to go see this film in a theatre, I mentioned to my mother that I was seeing a foreign movie. Her reaction? “Blah, I hate foreign films!” I believe she was talking about those that require subtitles (she's a dub instead of a sub person) but after that reaction I figured she did not want to know that I was going to see a New Zealand/United States mockumentary about vampires. Quite clearly I have different movie tastes than that of either parent.

Anyhow, I had heard high praise for this here and elsewhere so when I had the opportunity to watch this on the big screen I was happy to do so. Like I said this is a mockumentary where several vampires (including one silent bloodsucker who looks just like Nosferatu) live in a Wellington house and they are filmed for a few months. You see that they experience the sort of problems regular people can have with roommates (not doing the dishes/leaving trash laying around) but also problems that presumably none of us have to deal with (issues with werewolves, a human lady that helps the vampires wants to be turned but that keeps on getting delayed).

This horror/comedy is always really funny, especially for horror fans and those that know vampire lore. That gets playfully spoofed and many tropes are spotlighted and made fun of. It was nice to laugh at all those humorous moments with a crowd. I don't want to spoil too much of the plot or the various surprises that happen but such things as a young newly turned vampire wanting to be buddies with the old guard but they prefer his nerd human friend instead... a lot of this is like what we could typically experience in our lives... except that none of us are undead and hundreds of years old. For the fans of gore, there are a few rather bloody moments.

Quite simply, I give my highest recommendation to those horror fans out there to see this as soon as they can.

Last Night...

I might as well do this now. I was going to watch something, then I suddenly did not feel well at all. I think I was just too damn tired so I just felt like relaxing. Plus, ever since I attended a sporting event on Saturday, my back hasn't felt good; those chairs just weren't comfortable. So, while I won't have any movie reviews today, tonight I'll either for sure watch something at home or I'll go out to see a movie on the big screen. Either way I'll be back tomorrow night with a review, guaranteed.

The Visitor

The Visitor (Stridulum) (1979)

Runtime: 108 minutes

Directed by: Guilio Paradiso

Starring: John Huston, Lance Henriksen, Paige Conner, Glenn Ford

From: Several different companies

Here's a film that became infamous and much more known once the Alamo Drafthouse acquired it back in 2013. It showed up on TV late last night so that's how I was finally able to see it. I wasn't a fan, but I do understand why it has its fans; I am not irrational about such things unlike too many out there. The review from Letterboxd is below, minus the first stanza where I say to everyone on Letterboxd that if you follow me and you spam my feed with like 500 plus likes of other reviews in the row, you'll get unfollowed immediately. I'll be back tomorrow night.

Via TCM Underground showing this film late last night I was finally able to see this 1979 film that had mainly been forgotten until the Alamo Drafthouse remastered it and put it on the big screen in late '13, with a disc release a few months later. It fit in with my month of foreign film watching, this Italian production filmed in Atlanta, Georgia.

I had heard this was really weird, and that was not a lie. Franco Nero as pretty much Space Jesus talking to a bunch of bald kids about a longstanding cosmic feud and now the evil Sateen is basically reincarnated as a random 8 year old blonde girl on Earth (w/ a hawk that helps her out) and John Huston has to go to our planet to make sure good prevails in the end... and this nonsense also has Lance Henriksen, Mel Ferrer, Shelley Winters, Glenn Ford and even Sam Peckinpah. I was not expecting such things as a pro basketball team, Atlanta's old arena The Omni, and an iceskating rink (what a befuddling and goofy scene that was) to be involved also, but they were.

While I do understand those that like it, I really didn't. Even for an Italian horror movie it made absolute zero logical or story sense and hilariously stupid moments and memorable scenes aside, this was too often a slog to get through so I can only give it two stars, drug-fueled lunacy aside. I also have to note that while the score is fine-of course there's a ripoff of Also Sprach Zarathustra-it is not used right in the movie; it too often doesn't fit the scene and it's WAY too loud and overbearing to the point of absolute distraction. There's another reason for the rating right there.

Dhoom

Dhoom (2004)

Runtime: 129 minutes

Directed by: Sanjay Gadhvi

Starring: Abhishek Bachchan, Uday Chopra, John Abraham, Esha Deol, Rimi Sen

From: Yash Raj Films

Here's something different from me, me reviewing a movie from India. I haven't seen too many, and yet due to their sheer zaniness I really should see more. I'll return tomorrow night.

Throughout my life I have seen films from many different parts of the world, but I haven't seen too much from the country of India, despite how extensive their film industry is, my knowledge of how wacky Bollywood is and the absolute batsh*t crazy lunacy that is their action movies. Clips of insane action scenes both old and new are not hard to find online. I decided I should see a well-known Indian movie from recent times, one that I figured would be wacky, as I heard it's like the first Fast & The Furious. Boy, did I not know what I was in for!

It's true that this film was like the first in the long-standing franchise with Dominic Toretto and Brian O'Conner (except that it's young handsome dudes on motorcycles who do thefts while on the highway) although I was also reminded of another film from '04... Torque! I do need to watch that again so I can review it for the site. Nothing is quite as ineptly hilarious as Torque but Dhoom has many crazy moments (hell, there's even wire-fu) and Torque does not have several musical numbers, which of course this movie does due to it being from India. Both do share a rather nonsensical plot, so there's that.

The plot is that a straight-arrow cop (to the point of coming off like a dick at times, to state it bluntly) has to work with a low-level criminal named Ali who also engages in illegal street races on his bike in order to try and stop the quartet of thieves who do those brazen thefts. Note that all the thieves work at a PIZZA PARLOR that is called... PIZZA PLACE. I swear this is true. Also, Ali is a quite horny man always looking for a future wife; that is how he meets the cop's wife, whose name is Sweety as... well, why the hell not? The hero is named Jai Dixit, after all. Although, I think that Michael Bay would be even hornier if he ever watched this! Much of this is shot in a flashy way. It's not just the musical numbers that are filmed like a music video. The camera moves about a lot, there's slow motion... I think he'd view this without pants on.

The movie's definitely uneven and it ends up being where the unintentional comedy is funnier than much of the actual comedy. Still, due to the madness on display and how stupid it got at times, I managed to enjoy this nonetheless and the rating seems appropriate.

I do have a random thought... from what Indian films I've seen, it's always been where quite often you hear words or usually entire phrases in English. This motion picture is in Hindi and the other times I've experienced it it was either that language or Tamil... I'll just say it's another weird aspect of that weird but cheerfully berserk movie scene.

The Empire Strikes Back

The Empire Strikes Back (1980)

Runtime: 124 minutes

Directed by: Irvin Kerschner

Starring: Oh, you know all of the cast

From: 20th Century Fox

Yes, I saw a major film from my childhood last night... and in it's original theatrical widescreen form as people saw in theatres in 1980. I won't give too many details about how I less than 100% legally saw such a version. Instead, read my Letterboxd review below and note that I'll return late tomorrow night-as in close to midnight-with another review.

I'll be honest here and say that I wasn't planning on watching this last night... but when I heard the news about Harrison Ford I figured I should. While he'll be OK at first I was quite concerned about it; while you can certainly say things about his recent career choices or the performances he's delivered during that time, back in the day he was incredible and I certainly watched his films as a kid, especially what is known now as Episodes IV through VI.

Early last year I found (nevermind how) a high quality widescreen print of the original version of Star Wars. Well, the same goes with this film. Let me copy and paste what I wrote in my review for the first Star Wars:

"Don't worry, this isn't the first time I've seen this movie; the original trilogy has been a longtime favorite for me and I've seen them often since about the age of 8 or 9 (I am now almost 33). I've seen it on VHS, DVD and Blu-Ray, but a few nights before was the first time I've seen the original theatrical version in widescreen, and in real good quality at that.

As to how I was able to acquire that version of the film... well, it was less than 100% ethical, but there are people online who have created "despecialized" versions of the original trilogy, and until the original versions get a proper DVD/Blu-Ray release...

It was nice to see it in its OG form, without the "fixed" special effects or especially the goofy changes and additions that George Lucas insisted on but either served as distracting or downright betrayed characters or ruined scenes. Instead this was how I remembered the movie from watching it on VHS often, except it was now in widescreen."

With that out of the way, I was happy to watch this. While I love the first, this is the better movie and not just because “it's a dark story”; rather, the budget was bigger and with the advances in effects they were able to do more and they created some awesome setpieces, from the brutal cold of Hoth to the swampy Dagobah to the snazzy Cloud City. The fact that Irwin Kershner is a better director than George Lucas does help too.

But more important than the action or the settings (or even the musical score, which is legendary)... the characters. The villains are perfect and you love to hate them as they try to stop the rebellion, while the heroes go through a variety of problems, from their ship not operating correctly to desires of love causing conflict, from Luke Skywalker having to go through Jedi training that is tough physically AND mentally, to an act of betrayal... it's all so engrossing and it makes you want to see Return of the Jedi to see how the protagonists can overcome all that and squash the evil empire. What a great film this is.

Hopefully one day the original trilogy can finally come out on Blu in their original form so me and others don't have to do underhanded things to see them exactly as millions have before, the versions that caused us to fall in love with them. Before Episode VII comes out in December I will watch Jedi again and also Episodes II and III for review... the last two, I am not really looking forward to watching those massive disappointments!

Grand Exit

Grand Exit (1935)

Runtime: 68 minutes

Directed by: Erle C. Kenton

Starring: Edmund Lowe, Ann Sothern, Onslow Stevens, Robert Middlemass, Wyrley Birch

From: Columbia

Here's a short review from me; makes sense as I saw a short movie. I'll give a spoiler and say that tomorrow night's review will be of a film I've seen many times in my life and it is one featuring Harrison Ford. As of now there's still differing opinions on his condition but as someone who has seen his films since I was real little, I really hope he ends up being fine.

Basically, I came to watch this as I saw it was on primetime last night on TCM, part of a month long deal where each Wednesday night they spotlight the films of Ann Sothern. I looked online and saw that it was barely watched here on Letterboxd and less than 100 people on the IMDb have given it a vote so I figured I should give it a shot.

The plot is that an arsonist is burning down buildings insured by a certain company. That company brings back a wild womanizer (Tom Fletcher, played by Edmund Lowe) who loves the bottle and isn't always easy to work with but as he's “the best” arson investigator they have to deal with him. A young lady (Sothern) always seems to be around when they start... is she the one starting them; is Tom Fletcher the guy behind those acts, wanting his job back? While there's a moment or two that doesn't make much sense (in an alternate universe where this movie was longer I doubt those plot holes would be there), it's not too egregious.

I actually don't have too much to say about this. It's average all around, from the story to the sleuthing (for being so highly praised early in the film, Fletcher sometimes comes off as ineffectual), from the humor-there's a running gag involving him having a revolving door of secretaries which is barely a subplot and it kind of seems pointless-to just about everything else. At least it's short at 68 minutes and the two leads are charming, which helps. It's just that there's no real need to see this unless you are a fan of either Edmund Lowe or Ann Sothern.

Touki Bouki

Touki Bouki (1973)

Runtime: 89 minutes

Directed by: Djibril Diop Mambety

Starring: Magaye Niang, Mareme Niang, Aminata Fall, Ousseynou Diop

From: Cinegrit/Studio Kankourama

Here is another review from me where I go against the grain. In this case it's a highly praised movie from the country of Senegal and I really don't get the praise. I explain why below and I'll return tomorrow night.

I realize that I am an outlier here as most who have seen this film from Senegal rate it higher than I do and in fact cries of it being “great” aren't too hard to find. Maybe I haven't seen enough French New Wave or similar films but I just did not really enjoy watching this at all. It's a shame as I really did want to like this, a film known as The Journey of the Hyena in its native Wolof language.

The story is rather simple: two young adults (a male and female couple) live in the capital of Senegal, Dakar. They're in the poor slums of the city, outside of the high rises and nice houses. They wish to leave to go to France, the country that for about 100 years up to 1960 had Senegal as one of its colonies. As they're poor they try a few methods of acquiring cash to leave. That's really about it. Not a whole lot happens in this glacially S-L-O-W movie, and it's oddly paced to boot. Now, I am not a rube that needs ADD editing or frenetic pacing to be entertained. To list a random example, I never though Refn's Drive was “dull” or “boring”.

It's just that the two leads are total blank slates and you're never given any real reason to care about them, their plight, or their desire to leave their country and hope for something better in another country. Instead, the movie has abstract moments and some surreal ones too. That'd be fine, except that as a whole I thought this movie didn't work and all that nonsense didn't really matter. Oh, and for anyone who is an animal lover, a vegetarian lover/vegan or just don't like seeing cows and goats legit getting killed on camera and graphically seeing the blood pour out of them as they're killed... I am not a vegan by any means but I had no idea that was in this film and I personally did not see to see it. Those more sensitive, you have been warned.

Personally, I was actually more interested in checking out how Senegal looked back then. I sadly don't know much about Africa in general and I do need to look up information on that for my own education. What I saw in the film (and I had plenty of time to look at the scenery due to the slow as molasses pace) it was clear that there were still French influences, such as the automobiles; there were plenty of Citroen and Renault cars to look at, and judging from a billboard they still sold French cars there at the time, and presumably still do now. The obvious differences between those that had money and those that don't were apparent. I got to see the colorful traditional outfits the common folk wore and even the country's version of wrestling-amateur and not the sort of stuff that John Cena does-known as Laamb in Wolof.

Maybe what I am saying is that I'd prefer a documentary about the country, its history and how it's managed to be one of the better countries on the continent in the post-colonial era, at least when it comes to such things as political coups and much of the turmoil that plagues too many countries there. I'd obviously get more out of that than what I got out of this, where apparently much of it was lost on me. At least the actual filmmaking was good for someone who I understand had no formal training and the Triumph motorcycle with the cow skull looked pretty rad...

Trollhunter

Trollhunter (Trolljegeren) (2010)

Runtime: 103 minutes

Directed by: Andre Ovredal

Starring: Otto Jespersen, Glenn Erland Tosterud, Johanna Morck, Tomas Alf Larsen

From: Several Norwegian companies with long hard to spell names

After watching something very obscure I watched a pretty well-known recent foreign genre movie, from the lands of Norway. The Letterboxd review is below and I'll return tomorrow night.

After watching something super obscure to start off this month, I decided to watch a popular foreign film ever since it came out in 2010. This was back in the time before people started to tire of the found footage genre, but this seems to be one of the higher rated ones out of that subgenre, which seems to be populated with total dreck.

The plot is that three young filmmakers start off doing a documentary about a suspected bear poacher but it turns out that he's actually the title character and they end up following him watching what exactly he does, which is supposed to be a secret as it's a government conspiracy (I imagine it's a worldwide thing to think that your country's government covers up major events). The whole field is explained and you see how they're eradicated, the different varieties, how they live, etc.

The whole thing is a little far fetched but you go with it as the movie treats it seriously. It's tongue in cheek but is done with total seriousness. Now, I am not insulting the folklore of that region of the world. It's just that some of those trolls are very large, as in 50 feet or more. Still, the world is rich (e.g., as it's the government, you have to file paperwork after each troll killed) and that is a big help and kept me interested the entire time, even if the other characters aren't too developed and Hans the Troll Hunter is the crux of the focus... it is a great character and I liked the performance from Otto Jespersen.

Also assets were that with the low budget (I understand only the equivalent of a few million American dollars) the trolls weren't shown too often. They looked fine the times you do see them; if they would have shown up more often, they'd probably look crappy with the budget. The natural scenery of Norway was a big plus. From what I've seen all the Scandinavian countries are absolutely beautiful and that is in full effect here; I enjoyed gawking at that.

While this is more a fun movie than a scary one, it's still enjoyable and just a pleasant experience.

The Blood Stained Route Map

The Blood Stained Route Map (Pimudun Ryakpae) (2002... or 2004)

Runtime: In total, approximately 140 minutes

Directed by: Phyo Kwang

Starring: Chang-su Choe, Ryon Hwa Kim

From: Korea Film

Here is something quite different for me as I unofficially participate in the annual month long watching of foreign films over at Letterboxd... a movie from NORTH Korea. That's right. It's technically a two part film but I have the reviews for both parts below. I shall return tomorrow night.

Part 1:

The past two years, I've enjoyed the deal where for a month Letterboxd users watch movies from other countries every day during said month. I do it too but the past two months it was after the fact so it was unofficial and it's far less than 30 or 31 films. This year I am managing to do it on the correct month and who knows how many films I'll end up seeing.

I decided it'd be rather interesting to watch a film (actually released in two parts, even if the two parts put together are only 140 minutes; the second part's coming up in a few minutes) I found out about from this site. Yes, it is from North and not South Korea, and there's actually a copy of both on YouTube with English subs. Now, I only knew the North Korean cinema scene from Pulgasari, a film I can't say I've seen. Somehow, the idea that the director and his wife were kidnapped from South Korea and for years he was forced to make films and this was one of them... it doesn't fill me with desire to check it out.

But, due to this month and judging solely from Letterboxd and the IMDb hardly any people at all (let alone from the West) have seen this so I figured I should check it out and try to rate it fairly despite my great sadness at what has happened in the country since the Korean War decades ago. I don't want to bring politics into this so let me move on and talk about the film.

I'll briefly explain the plot of the movie here. It's not presented in the clearest of fashion but 10 years before the present time of the film (which is set in the past) the Japanese are looking for two gold Buddha statues that are on an island. Besides them being gold statues it also states the identity of the rightful owners of the island; the importance of the islands strategically to the Japanese is explained.

The father splits the map in three and gives it to his sons. Pops is soon dead but the kids escape. While the majority of the film is in present time, there are flashbacks to ten years prior and you see what happened to the characters and how the ended up where they did. One of the sons early on kills himself rather than give up his piece so you follow the now adult two surviving brothers who have been separated for years.

The movie was made in this century and yet it looks older than that. I am not surprised that country's film scene would have primitive film equipment, or that all the sound was added in post-production. While I understand the circumstances of the country this film was made, this isn't too good. In the review of Part 2 I'll post soon I'll explain why.

Part 2:

Minutes ago I posted a review of Part 1 of this two part movie. Why it was released in 2 parts when they are each 70 minutes long I cannot explain... then again to keep things in perspective there are way more important questions I have about that country.

If you are wondering about story structure or other things from a country where the citizens are forced to be isolated from the rest of the world... judging things just from one motion picture may be a big leap but even in North Korea the film scene is like the rest of the world. There are such cliches here as a rebellious daughter, people looking for revenge, an outsider entering a competition and doing well in it & that sort of thing. While the movie isn't always presented in a clear fashion, amongst all the dialogue there are action scenes that are actually fine (whether it be sword fights, martial arts, or other forms of combat), and the filmmaking itself is just like a low-budget film from everywhere else. Generally in terms of how the plot is put together it's the same as elsewhere and depending on your knowledge of the ethnicities of that part of the world you'd either think this is from elsewhere in the Pacific Rim region of Asia or that it was South Korea. They didn't try to reinvent the wheel, in other words.

The reason I rate it as 2 stars is how things are muddled sometimes, it likely could have been shorter and that would have helped, and the amateurism does hurt things. I do realize the government does play a big role in the North Korean film world and who knows how big their role was in this story, but I can surmise any person who makes films there is hampered by them and how they can't learn like other filmmakers can, especially in more developed countries.

It was certainly different to watch a motion picture from that particular world. It wasn't an alien experience or surreal to watch. It was shot and put together in an acceptable manner so it was not like Birdemic or anything else amazingly inept. It's just a mediocre piece of work, that's all.