Reviews

'Zeitgeist' is certainly reminiscent of conspiracy documentaries that have become popular in recent years, mostly due to their free distribution over the internet. However, the most obvious problem with films of this type is that they almost always find themselves preaching to the converted.

The key points in 'Zeitgeist' are interesting, and the film's analysis of the US and Global financial systems is well worth watching. The film's comment on religion and politics is also interesting, but it all descends - perhaps inevitably - into standard conspiracy, ultra-radical and nonsensical suggestions about how to improve our global community. The film leads up to a final sequence which looks like a cult recruitment tape.

Unfortunately, once you peel back the initial layer of the financial and religious exposé, you are left with something little more advanced than a marijuana-inspired 'put the world to rights' session. The film's 'revolutionary' suggestion that we create a Utopian money-free society is about as realistic as telling us all to go and live under the sea.

If we really want to make the world a better place, we're going to have to look more at adapting what we have rather than throwing everything away and starting again, as is the conclusion of the film.

Having seen the Northern Ireland premier of this home-grown horror film at QFT in Belfast, I can now share my disappointment in its complete lack of features that would lead me to recommend it. 'Freakdog' tells the somewhat original tale of a comatose man's control over a group of friends, leading them to commit unspeakable acts. Unfortunately, it fails on almost every level; a complete non-starter as a horror film and totally incoherent as a thriller.

The opening portion of the film is simply dull; a chance for the screenwriter's occasionally competent dialogue to be ruined by an ill-conceived cast. The character development is so lacking that all human aspect of the story is played entirely in cliché, and the standard of acting is poor even for a low-budget independent feature.

Of course, the purpose of this film is obviously to provide either shocks or genuine, disturbing scares. It delivers neither. The film is utterly inept as a horror, offering nothing but a series of mild gore scenes to fans of the genre. Essentially, this film is mixture of poor acting, dull cinematography and a script that, despite a few good pieces of dialogue, is both confusing and simplistic in equal measure. However, the production team must be commended for successfully shooting a U.S-set film in Belfast, which is carried of convincingly.

Overall, 'Freakdog' is a poor effort when pitched against either major Hollywood horror films or the usual B-movie fare. It fails to deliver the necessary scares and constantly suffers from poor acting and a ludicrous storyline. I really cannot recommend this film, which is a real shame as I was hoping it would deliver so much more.

Metal mogul-turned-director Rob Zombie hits out at the slasher genre with this ludicrous and ill-advised remake of John Carpenter's genre defining work. Along the way, Zombie takes the audience on a journey of how to make an inept horror film. Its a useful exercise.

The concept of remaking Halloween would seem simple to most fans. Update the simple storyline with modern actors, somehow incorporate modern technology and stick to the original script as much as possible. Zombie takes a refreshing new path; throw out the original script, tack on a lengthy and dull prison-based first half, remove any genuine scares and replace them with over-the-top gore and explain Michael Myers' psyche with a pointless opening sequence full of comedy stereotypical characters.

As a director, Zombie shows little understanding of the genre. His style is akin to a thirteen year old who has just been permitted to watch his first R rated film. Overuse of gore does not compensate for genuine horror - as the original Halloween so perfectly demonstrated. In fact, if one thing was strikingly obvious about remaking Halloween, it would be this; what is not seen is more frightening than what is.

The acting from all concerned is of a poor standard. Other than the embarrassed-looking Malcolm McDowell, the performances in this film are extremely poor. Even McDowell is no substitute of Donald Pleasance, but he is at least watchable. Child player Daeg Faerch is weak as a young Myers, and Scout Taylor-Compton captures nothing of Jamie Lee-Curtis' vulnerable Laurie Strode.

Rob Zombie's Halloween is filled with poorly-conceived plot developments. For example, why would Judith Myers keep a William Shatner Halloween mask underneath her bed? Pointing out these hopelessly coincidental moments is perhaps the only enjoyable thing about watching this film.

Overall, Rob Zombie's Halloween is exactly what most fans of the original film expected it would be. The story has entirely lost its novelty, the film lacks any genuine scares as Zombie goes for gross-out gore and ghost train style jumps. Combined with uninspired acting, dull cinematography, a painfully lacking screenplay, a boring re-hash of John Carpenter's musical score and a tedious opening half make this film literally unredeemable. Frankly, it is just rubbish.

(1980) D: Ruggero Deodato S: Robert Kerman; Francesca Ciardi; Luca Barbareschi M: Riz Ortolani

Straight laced university lecturer Kerman is presented with the case of four documentary film-makers who disappeared in the Amazonian jungle. Leading an expedition to find them, he discovers a tribe of natives who feast on the flesh of humans. The most memorable part of the film consists of the recovered footage of the ill-fated documentary crew's exploration of the tribe.

As repulsive as it is important, Cannibal Holocaust is a genuinely unsettling film experience. Deodato's relentless portrayal of cruelty and violence is by no means reserved for the cannibal tribesmen - the documentary film-makers are presented as voyeuristic and violent people.

A comment on Italian 'mondo' documentaries of the 1960s and 1970s, Deodato makes a clear point about the invalidity of reporting on primitive civilizations when the film-makers themselves revel in the sadism and cruelty. However, Deodato's social commentary falls short due to his own actions during the film's production - the genuine slaughter of animals and the re-use of violent footage from a 'mondo' documentary are precisely the actions that the director is condemning.

Performances from Robert Kerman and Francesca Ciardi are the highlights here, with fine supporting roles from Barbareschi and Salvatore Basile. The acting is generally of a higher standard than other Italian exploitation fare, as is the production. Music from Riz Ortolani is chillingly misplaced in parts, the score is one of the film's most notable achievements.

The strength of the imagery in Cannibal Holocaust is the factor which, to some, renders it unwatchable. To others, however, it is the film's most shockingly effective feature. Whether you love or hate Deodato's exploitation film, you will certainly not forget it.

One might argue that Cannibal Holocaust is the most effective horror film ever produced. For me, this is a perfectly valid argument. Never before had a film taken the unique stance of actually attacking the audience with such brutal scenes. Never before had a director blurred the line between fictional killing and actual slaughter to such an extent that some genuinely believed Cannibal Holocaust to be a 'snuff' film. Important and brutal, Cannibal Holocaust deserves none of its reputation as a 'schlock' horror film - it is far more valid than that.

Never has a film contained so much embarrassment. Not only on the part of the directors, producers, writers and actors, but on the person who has accidentally been duped into watching it. Perhaps the first thing I should say is that I watch bad movies - BAD movies - all the time. They don't phase me, I can sometimes see things in bad films that others can't. Maybe those things aren't there. Either way, bad movies get a lot of bad rep.

Farouk (Frank) Agrama's 1976 atrocity, Queen Kong, is almost certainly the worst film I have ever seen. Worse than Plan 9. Worse than Raiders of the Living Dead. Worse than Bride of the Monster. It is about 750 billion times worse than the Dino DeLaurentiis remake of King Kong and about 984 billion times worse than Peter Jackson's over-long take on the story.

Frankly, this film was doomed from the start. It was produced by Harmony Gold, a typically useless independent company (though they managed to drag themselves out of the gutter in the 80's and are now quite reputable). The writers/producers Ronald Dobrin (Robin Dobria) and Farouk Agrama (Frank Agrama) have assembled one of the worst casts, constructed THE worst ape suit and hired the least skilled effects technicians. The result is, as you can imagine, not pretty.

Much of the film takes place in Lazanga (where they do the Konga...apparently) though you would be forgiven for mistaking it for the English countryside. Combined with the bottom rate acting of Robin Askwith (better know for "Confessions of a Window Cleaner" which is hardly Citizen Kane) and the obviously embarrassed Rula Lenska, this is indeed a depressing affair. The utterly ridiculous ape suit is beyond laughable - much like the film itself - it is just depressing.

As the location moves to London (which recreates the theater scene from the 1933 King Kong in a cheaply designed open air setup) the script descends even further and the production values crash and burn. Surprisingly, it isn't the first time London has been ravaged by a giant ape (see 1961's KONGA) but it IS the first time the ape has looked so unconvincing. Cue cut scenes of postcard London landmarks and a dire-straits intimate moment between Queen Kong and Ray Fay (like Fay Wray - geddit?). Before you know it the film is over and you have lost 90 minutes of you life.

If you want to see a bad film, watch Agrama's 1980 effort (Dawn Of The Mummy) and avoid this one. It is beyond being simple 'bad', it is a crime against cinema (it seems that Paramount Pictures agreed, they attempted to sue Harmony Gold in 1976). This film is also guilty of theft. It WILL steal 90 minutes from you which you WON'T get back. Go ahead, call the police, they won't be interested! Do yourself a favour. Don't. Just don't.

AI is not a good film. That much is obvious to anyone hoping to enjoy a couple of hours entertainment. The film is a good 90 minutes too long, the characters are undeveloped and dull, the special effects are unconvincing, the script is without any kind of flair, the cinematography and editing are boring, the plot is uninspired and at times descends into stupidity and some of the film's actors are totally wasted. Shall we begin? From the off, AI is dull. The opening 30 minutes are probably the film's best, but that is not saying very much. The main actor, Haley Joel Osment is fine as "David", though he is not given a whole lot to do. The story of a family having lost its child and finding comfort in an artificial replacement is bearable, although there are moments in the first half of the film which suggest that it was originally intended to be a more sinister movie.

The biggest disappointment of the film is Jude Law. His character is completely irritating and adds little to the story. The use of some language in the film such as "Mecca" and "Orga" quickly gets annoying as the actors do not know how to deliver them.

Perhaps Stanley Kubrick would have made a better job of this. Spielberg's AI is a mess. The very worst thing about it is that it has a misguided sense of it own importance. This is not a thoughtful film, and it certainly is no landmark. It is, plainly, bad.

This dreary film based on an intriguing concept which cross-contaminates the Jack the Ripper murders with the "Dr. Jekkyl and Mr. Hyde" story. For such a far fetched idea, the script is painfully grim, with Perkins seemingly reveling in his relentlessly character. The film feels European in its pacing and photography, with the Budapest locations filling in for 19th century London.

Director Kikoïne plays the film completely straight, the moody script offering no respite from the tedious reel of violence and perverse sexuality. Other than Perkins, the supporting cast is forgettable, much like the film itself. Failing on the level of being scary, or entertaining, it is hard to recommend anything about this. Perkins shows his talent, playing two vastly different characters without the aid of radical make-up effects.

Like a nightmare, this film feels so much longer than it actually is. It is perhaps the longest 85 minute film ever made, which is no compliment. The story does not seem to progress anywhere, the film relies entirely on violence and sex - and frankly, there is too much of each. Anthony Perkins is acting below his level here, which is a terrible shame considering his talent. It is quite amazing that he still shines even in this piece of traumatic drivel. This surely is no "Psycho".

In conclusion, "Edge of Sanity" is neither enjoyable or scary, which one would suppose makes it a poor attempt. This is a wasted concept, the possibilities for such a story are almost endless, so why is this film bogged down with it's long, boring script? Die-hard Perkins fans may draw something from this, but for the average movie goer, give it a miss.

The Greatest of the Great Italian Gorefests! "The Beyond", directed by Italian all-purpose schlockmeister Lucio Fulci, is without a doubt the finest of the 80's gore flicks. The underplayed storyline concerns Liza, (Katherine MacColl) who inherits a creaky old hotel in Louissiana, USA. Predictably, the hotel is haunted by several zombies and just happens to be located on one of the seven doors to hell! Enter Doc (David Warbeck) who obviously "only deals in fact".

Director Fulci goes around the houses, not bothering too much with plot, and takes us on a tour de force of Video Nasty gore. Perhaps this is the reason why "The Beyond" is so enjoyable and entertaining. A nightmarish horror film, the acting is as it is, the direction is on par with other Fulci efforts and the photography has more Zoom than Nascar racing. Its exactly as an early 80's horror flick should be, and I think its great.

Gory to a high degree, but not comparable to films like "Cannibal Holocaust". "The Beyond" is more than just a gore film, it is a horror film and a very good one. The zombies look almost exactly like one would imagine a REAL zombie would look like - and that makes them extra menacing! Several scenes stick out in my mind as being particularly good; the cleaner's dip into the dirty bath is really creepy! Acting is fine, Fulci regular Katherine MacColl is as average as ever, New Zealander David Warbeck is great as the straight-talking Doctor and Giovanni de Nava is perfect as surly Joe, the plumber (both alive and dead).

Italian script mogul Dardano Sacchetti provides a good, if confusing script from his own story, collaborating again with Fulci after "House by the Cemetery". Fabio Frizzi's music is top notch. Other "House" crew members include Sergio Salvati who's cinematography is aided by slightly better production values.

All in all, "The Beyond" is a cracking horror film and should be enjoyed by everyone interested in Italian horror and 80's gore flicks. Better than "House by the Cemetery", infinitely more enjoyable than "Zombi" ("Zombie Flesh Eaters") and probably the greatest of the great Italian gorefests! 10/10

A tempting collaboration between comic author Frank Miller, movie whiz kid Robert Rodruiguez and everyone's favorite eccentric Quentin Tarantino binds CGI and good live performances well. Produced in much the same way as Rodruiguez's other recent efforts, the filming was confined to a Green Screen sound stage and the backgrounds added in post production. This process seems to get better with every film, though I would not say that any of these cyber-movies have surpassed "Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow" in their mixing of CGI and actors.

Sin City is a movie aimed at adults, but only specific audiences. Fans of either the comic series or gritty crime dramas will enjoy the film, but all others may walk away disappointed. The Bruce Willis/Michael Madsen segments of the film are typically Tarantino - the first portion of this segment is easily the best. The picture is divided into mini-movies, each with their own casts led by a name actor. The best of these is easily the Clive Owen segment, in which he helps a group of inner-city hookers defend themselves against thugs. Owen's good acting overcomes his slightly unconvincing American acting, and the segment passes through nicely.

The film has its flaws, the Mickey Rourke segment for instance is at best tedious. Rourke seems suited to the roll, but the secondary characters and the plot of the segment don't really 'work'. Some of the plot points are boring and unnecessary and some of the sequences are so dark that they are simply not enjoyable. Small roles by Josh Hartnett and Michael Clarke Duncan add nothing to the film, Hartnett's part is especially silly and was obviously shot over one day or so.

The best performance of the film comes from Bruce Willis, who is totally convincing as an aging cop. The on screen relationship between Willis and Jessica Alba are excellent, evidently displaying acting talent from the young actress and a return to form for Willis. Mickey Rourke is fine as Marv, perhaps only Rourke can play such a disgusting character who, despite being the hero, is revolted by the viewer. Elijah Wood does what it says on the tin as a demented serial killer, but the segment he appears in is far to vague. The random introductions of characters does not help and the story plod along.

Overall, Sin City is a solid movie, ideal viewing for fans of the genre. But one thing constantly annoyed me whilst watching the film; I got so bored with gun shots and punches to the jaw that I was about ready to administer one on myself! I feel their was a slight overuse of weapons in the film - but I suppose that would be expected. This is possibly the closest Comic Book conversion in movie history, and fans of the originals will obviously love this. Be careful, you will either love this film or be disappointed by it. I myself loved it, but pointed out the flaws for the purpose of reviewing it.

My rating is 7/10 - See it but be warned!

Dawn of the Mummy (1980) represents one of the only Egyptian produced films to feature Egypt's most famous character. Filmed on actual Egyptian locations, director Farouk (Frank) Agrama directs his cast of Calender models as they shoot in an ancient tomb! Man, they're just asking for it!

Sure, Dawn of the Mummy draws many of it's themes from the popular Zombie films of the 70's/80's. The title is more than a tad similar to George Romero's 1978 classic, and the film itself more than borrows from the Italian films being produced on the Zombie subject. But, I must say that I can't help but like this film. It is ludicrous, boring and unavoidably bad - but so what? It's a Mummy film!

This was one of the films to suffer cuts in the UK at that hands of Margaret Thatcher and the BBFC (hate...so...much!) and remained butchered in the UK until the good folks at Anchor Bay re-visited it with a cleaned up picture and all of the gratuitous scenes back in. Or so I thought.

Where is the gore? Where is the violence? Not here. This film is in no way worthy of it's "video nasty" trophy. In fact, I can't say this film isn't suitable for a five year old. The only gore scene I can remember is when a guy is decapitate. Yuck, I hear you say. Not really. You hear a scream and then see a Papier Mache ball roll down the sand dune.

So what is my conclusion? I like it. It's good, clean, hokey fun which you will keep going back to. Want a white knuckle video nasty? Buy Cannibal Holocaust. I really doubt that anyone from the BBFC actually watched this film during the onslaught of the video nasties in 1980 - I expect they looked at the genre; Zombie film. This is a funny film suitable for the entire family - take it for what it is!

Grand master of adventure Clive Cussler finally has one of his Dirk Pitt novels placed on the big screen properly and doubtless to say, Sahara is a roaring success. Taken in the vein of classic films such as Indiana Jones, and to a lesser extent Romancing the Stone and Alain Quatermain, adventurer Dirk Pitt and his likable companion Al Giordino trek into Saharan Africa on the trail of a civil war artifact and two health officials. Obviously, nothing quite goes to plan and Dirk must enlist the help of various locals to help him on his way.

The casting of Sahara would never have pleased everyone, in die-hard Cussler circles the debate over the casting of Pitt and Giordino has raged ever since the release of "Raise the Titanic" when television player Richard Jordan took up the diving mask. In my personal opinion, both Matthew McConaughey and Steve Zahn pull off the rolls superbly. Also, William H. Macy is perfect as Admiral Sandecker.

This movie will not change your life, and neither will it try to. Intelectuals may want to stay at home and read an issue of Statistical Science because you won't find a meaningful, complicated and artistic film here. This is not a film, it is a movie. I great popcorn munching, entertaining movie and as long as you don't overestimate it, you won't be disappointed.

Forget your opinions of Breck Eisner because of his wealthy father, none of us choose our parents and it may just occur to you that he may have got the job because he is, well, a good director. Clive Cussler fans (like me) should enjoy this as long as they remember that this is not one of Cussler's masterpiece novels and it is extremely hard to transfer novels such as his onto film.

Keep and open mind as you stroll into the cinema and remember that you are about to experience a good old fashioned adventure story and not Citizen Kane. If you expect too much from a movie you will almost always walk out disappointed. I can't think of a single reason why you wouldn't like this movie - give it a try! 9.5/10 - GREAT!

Problem child Samara is back and up to no good again. After killing a teenager in a small Washington town, she, for some reason, decides to go after old enemy Watts and son Dorfman. Ring Two is nothing to do with the superior Japanese film, though original director Hideo Nakata replaces Gore Verbinski at the film's helm.

The Ring Two has its moments, but is shockingly uneven. The use of CGI doesn't fit with this type of film and some scenes are particularly laughable (watch out for the flying water). With a lack of real scares, Ring Two relies on horror at a psychological level, but is not inventive and most of the horror is re-hashed from either the first film or "The Exorcist".

The acting is generally of a good standard. Watts provides a solid, if slightly underplayed performance as Rachel. The brightest star if the film is youngster David Dorfman who is particularly good as Aidan. Elizabeth Perkins is, as usual, believable as the psychologist. Sissy Spacek is disappointingly mellow as Samara's mother, but is satisfactory.

The Ring Two is a poor attempt at a horror sequel which has lost all surprise and menace. If you have seen and enjoyed the American Ring film, then you may get something from this but I doubt it. If you are a fan of the Japanese originals, steer clear as you will be disappointed. This remake has none of the originality that made the Japanese sequels so fresh and is merely a poke at the teen-horror box office pie.

4/10 - Below Average

Badly produced film in the endless Italian action genre. This film scrapes even the barrel of 80s Italian cinema. Unconvincing in every respect, the acting is almost as bad as the dubbing and the production values are almost as bad as the European locations posing as the middle east. A movie which seems to be utterly useless, a complete waste of time and cannot be recommended. Not even fun, it is simply tedious and boring from start to finish and doesn't fit into the so bad it's good category. Footage of Miami was actually shot for an earlier film "Thunder Squad" directed by Umberto Lenzi. Luigi Mezzanotte (here credited as Conrad Nichols) worked with director Tonino Ricce (here Anthony Richmond) on the equally terrible "Thor: The Conqueror". Thankfully, both seem to have crawled back into the woodwork of Italian cinema and haven't bothered us since.

A truly awful film, not worth any amount of money. There are many fun Italian B-pictures, but this is not one of them. This is a grade Z movie and is just as bad as it sounds.

If there was a 0 out of 10, this would get it, but I'll have to settle for a complimentary 1 out of 10.

Character driven indie film supposedly based on actual events never quite manages to deliver the goods. Billed as a genuine fright-film, Open Water's marketing campaign packed far more punch than the film ever could. A prime example of a low-budget film being blown out of the water (no pun intended) by an overpowering advertisement campaign.

The story is that of two scuba divers who are left behind by their tour boat. The result is a "terrifying" (more like boring) day and night trying to hang onto life. Of course sharks are the deadly assassins here, though they are very real and unlike the larger-than-life creatures in superior pictures such as "Jaws". This realism does not, however, lead to scarier situations as the sharks are obviously wild and incapable of being properly wrangled for shots. There are still effective sequences and a few jumps, but not anywhere near as many as I expected.

The quality of the movie varies widely from scene to scene. The very beginning of the film is particularly poorly shot (which seems strange as this scene is in the controlled environment of a house). The film does well considering the small budget, and you can only feel happy for the film-makers having made so much money from this marginal investment.

Overall, the film is pretty un-enjoyable. Doubtless to say, fans of the Blair Witch Project will take it as their own, and those movie-goers who make it their business to defend this type of film will obviously like it.

D: Nicolas Roeg. Donald Sutherland; Julie Christie; Hilary Mason This Low-budget, shaky piece of high art cinema is slow and in some parts very boring. However, it succeeds in almost every way. A film that is widely believed to be one of the scariest ever made, Sutherland and Christie perform solidly supported by a classy cast and ice-cold Venice locations. This is a film, which cannot be appreciated and/or enjoyed by all, but for those who stick with it, it is incredibly effective. I for one fail to understand exactly what gives this film its 'Art film' classification. The camera-work in this film is the last thing to write home about. It is a film shot principally with hand-held cameras – occasionally shaky and out of focus. The style of photography borrows heavily from Italian films (lots of zoom, hand-held) and is, frankly, nothing special at all. The story of this film is superb. The concept plays perfectly with the locations and the actors. Sutherland and Christie completely shed their 'celebrity' looks and are totally believable as a troubled couple. The famous sex scene is in no way the films high point, but serves its purpose while being reasonably explicit for its age. The main reason to see this film is easily the earth-shattering climax. I cannot say enough about how superb the ending is and I suggest that anyone who has not experienced it, do so! ***1/2

D: Roland Emerich. Dennis Quaid; Jake Gyllenhaul; Ian Holm. I wanted to like this film, I really did, but to be honest, it is just a sly, pessimistic disaster film with more CGI than sense. Scientist/Meteorologist Quaid makes a shocking discovery which leads him to believe that a new ice age dawns. Typical English professor Holm agrees with him, but no-one with any authority does. This ridiculous story begs many questions: If such a huge fluctuation in the climate were to take place, and all the evidence was there to back up the theory, wouldn't more scientists realise it? Why is the vice president left to make all the important decisions? What is director Roland Emerich's obsession with destroying New York City? If Quaid is a government scientist, why is he not allowed to use the facilities or talk to the people in charge? Why does the film have to deal with Quaid's wife as a doctor treating terminally ill children; a horribly manipulative afterthought to the story which, instead of bringing it down to earth, gives it a sickly feeling? Many of the questions have no answer except from this: The film is garbage. What really makes this film particularly unconvincing is that it completely relies on CGI technology which is simply not good enough. And also that is basically just a remake of Emerich's earlier `Godzilla' travesty minus the Lizard. However, on the plus side, Dennis Quaid isn't bad as the scientist and Jake Gyllenhaul shows talent as his son – but Ian Holm's performance as the professor is a bigger disaster for his career than the film itself. He genuinely looks embarrassed to be appearing in this picture. So, in conclusion, this film is a real waste of time. Let's all hope that Emerich makes a better movie next time (considering he hasn't made a good one yet, don't get your hopes up) or else stops making them all together. This is two hours of your life you won't get back.

D: Willard Huyck. Lea Thompson; Jeffrey Jones; Chip Zien; Ed Gale. Wildly enjoyable Sci-Fi Fantasy in which `Howard T. Duck' is mysteriously transported from his home in Duckworld and dropped into a rough community in Cleveland. Based on the Marvel comics series by Steve Gerber, Writer/Producers Willard Huyck and Gloria Katz teamed up with Star Wars legend George Lucas to adapt the wacky character to the big screen. A film that is widely remembered for being one of the all time great flops at the box office (it cost upwards of $35,000,000 to produce and took in around $16,000,000 U.S), it should be remembered as a pioneering effort in the field of Mechanical Effects, Stop Motion Animation (done by Phil Tippet) and `Super Light' Visuals (done by Joe Johnston). The lead character in the film, Howard, is created using a midget (successful actor/stunt performer Ed Gale) in a highly complex mechanical suit (which cost $2,000,000) and really must be seen to be believed. However, the film's chief problem appears to be that it is not aimed at children, to be honest it really isn't suitable for kids. This is not a children's film, and this is possibly the reason why it did not succeed. But for all comic book movie fans, seek out this rarity and enjoy it. Do not let this classic die, and pray for a DVD release. Highly recommended! Willard Huyck's final directorial effort to date.

D: John Guillermin. Linda Hamilton; Brian Kerwin; Mike Starr.

Silly but ambitious sequel to Dino DeLaurentiis' remake of the 1933 classic monster movie. Of all the wonderful stories that could be told using the most famous movie ape of all time, screenwriter Ronald Shusset (Alien, Dead and Buried) opts for a ludicrous tale about an overly involved scientist/doctor/biologist Hamilton and her emotional quest to save Kong. Future comedy talent Starr is wasted as a bad tempered facility guard while co-star Kerwin shows off his Indiana Jones impression as a `wild boy' adventurer. Only DeLaurentiis could make a good idea this bad. However, for a genuine Kong fan, this may provide some light entertainment – once you look past the terrible Carlo Rambaldi (King Kong, Alien) visual effects and the rambling, overlong script. Director Guillermin's final theatrical effort.

D: Edward D. Wood Jr. Gregory Walcott; Tor Johnson; Vampira; Bela Lugosi

A truly excellent example of the `so bad it's good' genre never fails to entertain. A film that really must be seen to be believed. Cult icon Edward D. Wood Jr, (Ed Wood) directs his usual cast of Hollywood nobodies and manages to create a film that has stood the test of time as well as any other. Director Wood's script was written around deceased star Lugosi (who had appeared in other Wood films, `Glen Or Glenda?', `Bride of the Monster', and tragically died after shooting a day's worth of footage with Wood for an unknown project). Airline pilot Walcott spies weird objects in the sky. Could they be related to the resurrection of the recently perished Lugosi, his spurious `double' and his completely implausible wife, Vampira? Detective Inspector Tor Johnson is on the case with bumbling cops Paul Marco and Conrad Brooks. Mismatched footage of Lugosi is blended with his body double (who is actually much taller than Lugosi and looks nothing like him) but this only adds to the fun. A film that should be seen by all. Lugosi's body double actually Chiropractor Dr. Thomas R. Mason. Followed by sequel `Night of the Ghouls'.

D: Joe Dante. Tom Hanks; Rick Ducommun; Bruce Dern; Carrie Fisher; Brother Theodore.

Normal guy Hanks and his Joe six pack friend Ducommun decide to investigate their reclusive new neighbours. Are they serial murderers? Or are they just eccentric? Director Dante takes a light hearted look at the prejudices of suburbia while maintaining an attractive atmosphere allowing a number of good laughs. Hanks is as likeable as ever while Ducommun and Dern give impeccable performances. Fisher steals the show as Hanks' worried wife. The story is remarkably straight forward, relying mainly on Ducommun and Dern for laughs. Hanks' comedic expertise is sometimes wasted in his 90% straight faced role, but he does have a few great moments, and lines Ducommun up for many more. An excellent and underrated film, essential viewing. Dante veteran Dick Miller appears as a bad tempered Garbageman.

D: Menahem Golan. Chuck Norris; Lee Marvin; Robert Forster.

Genuine 80's trash cinema takes a turn for the better with this action packed patriotic-pic. Director Golan blends relentless action scenes and straight faced drama with ease, keeping the picture interesting at all times. Produced by Israel's infamous Cannon Films (Menahem Golan – Yoram Globus) and starring Cannon vet Chuck Norris in the lead role, `The Delta Force' is terminally entertaining, patriotic and is quite typical of the 80's action film genre. The Jewish production make excellent use of the Israeli locale and the all star cast, which both make the film superbly watchable. However, this film is not for all tastes. Even though the film contains a perfectly plausable back story, some of the action scenes are only fun at a no-brainer level. Also, this film is fervently Anti-Arab. Marvin's last film. Followed by two Sequels. (8.75/10)

D: John Boorman. Burt Reynolds; Jon Voigt; Ned Beatty.

Nature mogul Reynolds leads a small expedition of three city slickers into the deepest reaches of the American Outback. `Deliverance' is a true classic. An excellent film with more than one perfect performance. This film is genuinely chilling, from the infamous `Duelling Banjos' sequence to the truly horrible `Assault' scene. Director Boorman creates a masterful, depressing atmosphere about the film which makes for a far from happy viewing experience. Filmed on location, Boorman makes memorable use of Widescreen, allowing the audience to be completely immersed in the drama and horror of the film. A wonderful movie. Beatty's big screen debut.

Well, maybe I wouldn't go as far as the above, but this movie is really good! As a fan of "bad" movies, I thought this movie was incredibly stupid, but it was great! Samuel M. Sherman is one of my favorite producer/directors. Right up there with Roger Corman and Stanley Kubrick! He plays the film well, using the little money that he had to produce an entertaining zombie horror. I am a fan of George A. Romero's "Dawn of the Dead", and this movie is not in any was a knock off of it! That is an acheivment in itself, as everyone knows that most films with the words "Living Dead" in the title owe a lot to Mr. Romero. So, if your a fan of "my kind of movies", "King Kong Lives" (1986), Plan 9 From Outer Space (1958) and Samuel Sherman's production of "Dracula vs. Frankenstein" (1972), then this film is AN ESSENTIAL WATCH! 8.5/10

This is a pretty good documentary focusing on the Japanese Godzilla. It contains interviews with such people as Director Jun Fukuda, the wide of the late Ishiro Honda and various people who basically don't add anything to the documentary such as Alex Cox. This documentary incorporates footage from rare shows like "Ultra Q" and films like "King Kong Escapes". I recorded this gem on its premiere showing in 1998 and I'm not sure if it has ever been repeated. I have watched the recording many times and it is still an interesting piece. All in all, this is a very good watch for all those interested in 'Zilla and should be looked out for in TV guides!