Reviews

Hell of a film. It made me smile a lot. But there were parts that I was far from smiling. This woman has been through the hell of cancer and come out triumphant. And I wish her all the luck in the world. I saw "White Diamond" at a special screening the night it was first premiered in London on Leicester Square. It touched me, watching footage of Kylie cutting short her Manchester show, apologizing and looking, if not very unwell, profusely sorry to her crowd. And the footage of Danni and Kylie together live on stage can't be described better than Danni does it herself. Watch the film, you'll understand. All in all, an amazing insight into a very private life. Keep going Kylie, we really do love you. x

Saw this the other day. What a laugh! Apparently, some films in the 70s were suffering from attention from Warners, who tried to ban them saying they ripped off their classic "The Exorcist". How this slipped by them I'll never know! Not a subtly or even majorly similar film, this is a complete remake! I mean even the same SOUNDTRACK! Tubular Bells is played EIGHT times in this movie. Get some imagination! They try their best I suppose. The actress playing Gul hasn't got any stunt performers standing in for her a la Eileen Dietz puking all over poor Jason Mller, no, this babe hurls the yellow (not green for once) puke herself. I totally loved the dramatic organ music when the bed levitated (God, it took so LONG!) and then the same music a few minutes later when the bed descended. Fantasticaly crap! The mother reminded me of my make up tutor. Hmmm. Couldn't look at this actress without seeing a foundation pot and a bruise wheel. Not to worry. How these people think they can do this and not get sued (hell, they managed) I will never know. Turks have BALLS! See it. It's trash, badly made and completely pants. Great stuff. :O)

Disappointment is something I`m used to from films. Come on, not every film can be great, even if I'm expecting it to be. This was another one. Why on earth Christopher Lee said Yes to this stinker I'll never know. Maybe it's because he got way more lines than he ever did in a Hammer Dracula. Even with the acting talents of Lee and Lom, this is still a lousy movie. The sets are fine, the music is atmospheric and the acting is at least acceptable (from some of the cast anyway). But at one point I was almost crying out for Klaus Kinski to say something. For god's sake, a couple of lines wouldn't have hurt, and the fact that Renfield is mute does not add to the character AT ALL. The promise that the film will tell Stoker's story exactly as it was written is a down-right lie, as Stoker didn't write half this rubbish. One thing the film must be congratulated on, is that for once, Dracula is not killed by Van Helsing, but Quincey Morris, as he was in the book. But the death scene is REALLY sh*t. I mean REALLY. Christopher Lee doesn't even act it well. If you're gonna watch a Dracula film, watch Horror of Dracula, or the acceptable Bram Stoker's Dracula. Bin this lame attempt at a film, don't even pay to hire it.

Just got this uncut on DVD, because I`m getting into sleazy horror and exploitation films. However, I was a touch disappointed with Flavia the Heretic. Yeah, there are a couple of nasty scenes, like the nipple slicing and stuff, but I`ve seen a lot worse. A generally good film, it dragged a little sometimes, and for the seventies, yeah, it was out there and controversial. I`ve just ordered Salo on DVD, I hope that`s more like what I want.

Saw Satanic Rites last night for the second time, and paid more attention this time. The film, if you`re waiting to see a lot of Dracula will be a bit of a let down (but let`s face it, since Taste the Blood of Dracula, I don`t think Christopher Lee has had 30 minutes screen time with all of the Dracula films joined together.) The movie starts slowly, with, for once, no Dracula resurrection scene. He`s just back, and does not appear until well into the film. (He appears in a scene obviously stuck in because they realized he had not made an appearance at all so long into the film). When Peter Cushing appears, you start to feel like this is a proper Hammer film after all. Peter Cushing really does this one justice. Then from the time he visits D.D.Denham, it is a pretty good Dracula picture. The action between our hero and villain gets going, and builds up to a reasonable finale. This is better than Dracula AD 1972, but as I have said before, the whole series should have stayed in Victorian times. Joanna Lumley is radiant as Jessica, who's character returns from the previous film. It is a pretty scary premise. Dracula, finally sick of being resurrected for 2 or 3 days at a time, wants to end it all, but in doing this, he wants to take everyone with him. THE WHOLE WORLD! It is a good plot which just happens to have Dracula as the figure-head. For once Christopher Lee gets a reasonably decent script and delivers his lines beautifully. A couple of points. In some of the Dracula films, we are introduced to new but apparently tested ways of dealing with the fanged one. Dracula, Prince of Darkness introduced clear running water, as used at the end of DPOD, in Dracula AD 1972, and in Satanic Rites. Then in AD `72 we are introduced to the fact that the good Count can be knobbled with a silver bladed knife. Handy, since Van Helsing has one. Then in this movie, Van Helsing introduces the Hawthorn bush, from which Christ recieved his crown of thorns. Guess where Drac ends up near the end? Do these things really work? Or is it just that sunlight and the old stake are boring now, and the writers just make these things up? I feel a bit cheated when someone like Dracula can be beaten by lightning, drowned in a moat (NOT running water), or overcome in a church (whereas he had already killed a girl and placed her body in a full blown God worshipping church.) This film, when it gets going, is a pleasing finale to the Christopher Lee years as Dracula, and to boot, Peter Cushing delivers a really good performance too.

This particular Dracula flick appears to have been just plonked in the middle of the whole series without any forethought about the previous movies. Resurrected by a blood vomiting bat in a castle that has never appeared in any of the other movies, Dracula returns to his reign of terror. Somewhere along the line, he gets a servant (Patrick Troughton) who shares his name with Dracula`s servant in Dracula Prince of Darkness. (Are they supposed to be the same person? If so, how come the original Klove was shot and killed?) and a beautiful busty vampette. The three play host to several visitors to the castle and Dracula gets to terrorise them as the film goes along. Christopher Lee is, of course excellent in the part, but the script does him no justice. He does bang on about a fire that peasants started in his castle a bit too much. One particular scene came as a surprise. Dracula catches aforementioned Vampette trying to get her teeth into a guy's throat. Instead of killing her by biting her again as before, he savagely stabs her to death with a long curved knife. A bit heavy for Hammer! Now, the end. Please...give it a rest. Dennis Waterman spears Dracula with a metal railing type thing, only to have Dracula remove it. Fair enough. He got Dracula in the stomach, not the heart. Then as Dracula raises the railing to spear him back, he is struck by lightning and essentially burns to death. Hmmm. One of the best parts about any Hammer Dracula is the resurrection scene, and Dracula's death scene. But STRUCK BY LIGHTNING? Disappointing Hammer, very disappointing. See it. It's worth watching. It`s OK. Just don`t laugh at the ending, or that god awful rubber bat.

An interesting entry into the series, but really, I feel there was still life in the 19th Century time frame. Bringing Dracula to the 70s was, I think a mistake. Christopher Lee seems to be mostly forgotten and never gets the opportunity to get out and do what he does best. He remains in an old disused church for the whole film and only has a few decent scenes. We have Peter Cushing here, of course, playing an excellent part as Van Helsing, which somewhat saves the film. Decent portrayals by Lee, Cushing, Beacham, Munroe and Neame are worth watching. The 2 best things about this movie are , 1, the opening. Hyde Park, and Dracula and Van Helsing and racing through on a horse drawn carriage battling it out. The carriage crashes and they are both thrown. Van Helsing recieving fatal wounds and Dracula impaled on a broken wheel. Pretty good stuff, although not enough lighting was used so the carriage top battle and following events are rather hard to see. 2, the finale. As Van Helsing plans to destroy Dracula he drives a silver bladed knife through the Count's heart, only to be removed by his Granddaughter Jessica. Van Helsing then lures Dracula out to his death. The first few moments between Lee and Cushing in this final battle are classic, and for the first time in the series history, the 2 main characters speak to each other. The film is worth a look, if you`re a fan of modern horror then Lee and Cushing will seem a little lost, but if you`re a fan of the old Hammer Dracula films, take a look, with the beginning and the end, you just might like it.

A stunning film from Hammer, etching this film in time forever. Christopher Lee takes the role and makes it well and truly his own with fantastic fight scenes and an excellent hissing performance. Peter Cushing is excellent as Van Helsing and having the two together in this movie makes it the ultimate Dracula. A bit strange as it doesn`t quite stick to Bram Stoker's novel, but does keep the names of all the characters. Joanthan Harker arrives at Castle Dracula to actually kill the Count and not to start a job as directed by Renfield, and ends up being bitten by Dracula. Van Helsing kills Dracula in an almighty finale by ripping down the curtains and frying our good Count, whereas in the novel, it is Quincey Morris who destroys him with a Bowie knife. The sets are lavish and the technicolor is stunning. Memorable performances from Lee, Cushing, Gough and Stribling take the Dracula genre to new heights and open it up for some pretty good sequels.

At the beginning of Dracula, Prince of Darkness wee get a re-cap of the end of this film. It reminds us of how good the original was, and while the sequels are good, they will never top this classic.

I saw Ghostwatch when I was 15 and it frightened the hell out of me. A stunning piece of television that lives on in people's memories over 10 years after it was broadscast it's one and only time. Now, after 10 years, it has finally been released on DVD, and it still makes me feel uncomfortable walking down dark streets.

Watching Ghostwatch 10 years on, I know where Pipes appears in the programme, and seeing on the special features of the DVD the actual actor who plays Pipes in full make-up, I KNOW it`s a hoax. I KNOW it`s a drama, but it still has the power to be very creepy. Michael Parkinson, Sarah Greene, Craig Charles and Mike Smith play truly excellent parts in this. Treating it like a documentary, they don`t necessarilly 'act', as present the programme. Fair enough, the mother and two daughters are absolutely pants at acting 'reality', but the others carry it off, and therefore save the show. However, it has it`s faults. At least one of the time Pipes appears is too long. This is the scene in the studio as Lin Pascoe and Parky are listening to the tape of the demonic voice,the ghost appears behind her, but stays there for too long. Times like this should be momentary glimpses, a kind of "did we see it or not?" The mother and daughters spoiled the whole thing of "documentary style footage" for me as they couldn`t act. And Dr Lin Pascoe barely carried it off without being a laughable flop also. Generally speaking, a triumph. Well made, well shot, and charged with enough bad publicity and controversy to be considered a legend in the history of television.

I remember Happy Families from first time round. A six episode series following the lives of the Fuddle family, the majority of which played by Jennifer Saunders. Most of the Comic Strip played small to medium roles, but Saunders shone through this. The series follows Guy (Adrian Edmonson)on his search around the world for his 4 sisters (Saunders). From an American soap queen to a hard case convict, Guy tracks them all down and takes them home to Granny (Saunders). Whenever I ask anyone if they have seen this programme, I always get a no for an answer. Am I the only one in the world who remembers it? Thank god for UK Gold, who repeated it in the early 90s, thanks to whom I now have a copy. if anyone out there remembers it, or even has a copy, think yourself VERY lucky. This was an example of 80s English comedy at it`s best, and I find it very sad that with regards to video sales, or future screenings, it may be gone for good.

Halloween 8. We all wondered how they were going to get away with it. Jamie Lee saying she wouldn't do any more, Michael being killed outright (finally) at the end of H20. But, here we are. Jamie Lee's fourth Halloween movie, and Michael is up and well again. It`s all explained at the beginning of the film in the old style: fob us off with 10 seconds of implausible plot explanations just to get back at the box office and for us not to think you`re a bunch of wankers for bringing him back to life. And they NEARLY got away with it. Personally, I don't buy the explanation of how Michael is alive, (did you see the way the ambulance flattened him against the tree at the end of H20? Did you see the way she belted into him, knocking him down the bank?) The "replacement" Michael, if he still had his head, would apparently be as indestructible as the man he was disguised as!

This film is OK on the whole. Personally, I do love the series; and, as always there are hits and there are misses. Part 6 was an unqualified pile of poo, and let`s not even mention part 3. But 8 is in between. Not a bad entry, with a good degree of violence and THANK GOD we had Jamie Lee, if only for a bit. After the beginning, it slows down a great deal, and when it does pick up it's OK, just not wonderful. And do we believe he's dead? The freakin` ambulance driver who got decapitated could have survived Michael's fate at the end of this film! It`s not very often that a series of movies can get better after a naff and embarrassing entry (part 6). But when H2O hit our screens, it picked up the whole Halloween series, and that film SHONE. If I had a choice of make Resurrection, or leave well enough alone, I`d have been happy to end my Halloween collection with Part 7.

Unstoppable Jason Voorhees is back in the 9th sequel to Friday 13th. The film delivers a pleasing mix, expected from a Friday movie. "2455?" I thought. "Nah"... Yeah! It is actually a very good film. Cryogenically frozen in 2010, Jason and an unfortunate girl accidentally frozen with him, are revived 450 years in the future, then... let the bloodbath commence. One thing I`ve disagreed with from Jason Goes to Hell, and Jason X, is that at the beginning of both films, it is not explained how Jason is back. I mean, come on! The resurrection scenes in the other films may have been predictable and corny, but they were fun! But, nonetheless, Jason's back. Do see the movie, it`s as much fun as the others, and, dare I say it... better that a lot of them.

It`s not many movies that make me want to write a review for IMDb.

I read all the reviews on here and thought this must be a truly disturbing and terrible film. However, I appear to be the only person to have seen it to think that this film is a load of old bollocks. I watched the uncut version of this film on DVD and was thoroughly disappointed. It was neither disturbing, scary or convincing. The acting is appaling and the plot is stupid. If a film maker wants to make a scary horror, it needs to be serious all the way through, as is A Nightmare on Elm Street. This film however introduces two bumbling cops into the plot, rather like a Laurel and Hardy double act, which takes off any edge the film supposedly already had. Now consider this. The bunch of psychos attack, humiliate and kill two girls. After this they decide to find somewhere to stay. Lo and behold! Where do they find? The house of one of their victims! While the parents of the unfortunate girl invite three complete strangers to spend the night (YEAH RIGHT!) the three are also heard spilling the beans about the murders. What ensues is something out of an adult carry on film. We get psycho Mommy demasculating one of the killers... (by the way, where was the blood?), Daddy acting all Nancy Thomson and rigging his house up with booby traps, and then turning into one of the Sawyer family from the Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Hmmm, is it REALLY just me, or has this film`s reputation taken it far beyond what praise (if any) it deserves. I hope people read this review before renting/buying or even watching this tripe. Save your money... IT`S CRAP!

Legend has always been one of my favourite films. The look of the film is just pure magic, as if Ridley Scott had visited a place and time just like the one portrayed, and re-created it effortlessly.

A young Tom Cruise stars as Jack, a forest child, who is in love with Lily (Mia Sara). Both are young, beautiful and innocent.

But in the beautiful simplicity of their world, exists the other side. Darkness (Tim Curry) is a hulking great red demon, determined to destroy the only 2 remaining Unicorns, and therefore banishing light from Earth totally, and ruling forever. It is up to Jack and his imp-like friend Honeythorn Gump (David Bennett, assisted by two dwarves, Brown Tom and Screwball to stop Darkness` plans, and rescue Lily from his clutches.

Tim Curry has always stuck in my mind as playing Darkness. His acting is superb, and shows what a huge range he has, comparing it to his amazing character portrayal in The Rocky Horror Picture Show.

As far as I know, this film has more different versions than a dog has fleas, but why? Why can`t censors leave a good film alone and let us all enjoy what was meant to be shown.

I wanted to see this film the day it came out. Hell, I wanted to see this film on the day of the previews. However, all showings were full to bursting point. So, after 3 or 4 days, I queued with the other 100 or so people, and took my seat. I remember looking round thinking to myself, "How many of these people have read the book?" So, as one of them, I reckon I can give a decent review.

"Hannibal" ISN'T SILENCE OF THE LAMBS! It`s a different movie! I`ve heard so many people muttering "It wasn't like the first one... " But that`s because it doesn`t TRY to be the previous film. For a start, TSOTL isn`t just about Hannibal Lecter, whereas this film completely focuses on him. It`s not the dark, broody totally tense film TSOTL was. Instead we have Antony Hopkins reprising his role as Hannibal "The Cannibal" Lecter and having a hell of a time doing it. You can tell Hopkins enjoys this part, and knows it belongs to him, and him alone.

"But Jodie Foster isn`t in it!" How many times have I heard that? If Julianne Moore had known how many times, I`m sure she would have re-considered taking the part. She does a fine job as Clarice Starling, and, as is very sensible, doesn`t try to be Foster acting the part. She plays it as if it were the first time the character had been seen by anyone. Don`t stick one character with one actor, I know it would be nice to, but the world doesn`t work like that.

As for the adaptation from the book... I sat waiting for characters to appear that didn`t... Plot lines to appear that didn`t, and Mason Verger`s gruesome doom at the hands, or mouth, of his pet eel. Well, I waited, and waited, and then the film ended. The film has a lot of differences in it from the book, partly because of time I suspect, but it doesn`t matter. Hannibal is still a very engrossing, grossing (!), and thrilling horror movie. Long live Hannibal Lecter!!!!

Dynasty was like a sister to the original oil soap Dallas. The tales of Blake Carrington and his wife Krystle enthralled millions every week, and just like Dallas, astounded everyone with it`s improbable story lines on occasion. Mention Dynasty to almost anyone, and they will return with these two now immortal words: SHOULDER PADS. The costumes for Dynasty, designed by Nolan Miller, were as famous as the Krystle & Alexis cat fights, of which, you may be surprised, there were only 2 in the original TV series. I am a huge fan of Dynasty, and could take a test on it I reckon, but to this day, I could watch it all over again and not be bored. In 1999, UK Gold, a UK cable channel advertised Dynasty, showing at 6pm Mon-Fri, with a scene from Dynasty, intercut with specially recorded scenes by Joan Collins (Alexis). After a few weeks, UK Gold changed Dynasty`s time slot, and therefore could not use this very entertaining advert, as Joan invited us to "Join me for Dynasty, weekdays at 6 on UK Gold..."

A reunion was shown in 1991, with a lot of the cast from the series reprising their roles. While not as high power as the series, and it certainly left a lot of plot holes since it was supposed to be a chance for viewers to find out where the story lines went after the series finished, it was a welcome return for all fans.