Change Your Image
mendzel
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Magicians: Life in the Impossible (2016)
FAKE Reviews - Beware
You know what film is an 8/10 or a 9/10? Wolf of Wallstreet. You know what film is not? Documentary on Magicians. Yet, judging by all of the high star ratings and glowing reviews, you'd think this film may win an Oscar(and one fake reviewer even suggested it!). Wrong. Fake reviews....they are plaguing IMDb.
Many of these reviewers have ONLY reviewed ONE FILM (This film!). The one reviewer who has multiple previously-reviewed films gives an unbiased, low rating. Surprise: 3 out of 4 people said his review was Not helpful. Weird right? A very insightful, unbiased review is met with such universal disagreement. I'm guessing These fake reviewers can't help but also sabotage legitimate reviews too. Pathetic.
Note to fake reviewers: at least pump in a few reviews for other films so you can appear to be a film fan and not affiliated with the film you are reviewing.
If anyone involved in the film (aka the fake reviewers) is reading this, please take note: YOU ARE RUINING IMDb! It has become a biased, fictitious ratings-land where the average consume cannot get an objective review of a film.
My suggestion: move along to a film that stands on its own merit and doesn't need to trick you into viewing.
Holy Hell (2016)
The film is called "Holy Hell" for a reason...
...and it appears many of my fellow reviewers are missing this point. Should a documentary look at both side? Sometimes, yes. Just as news-reporting should be unbiased, so should a well- meaning documentary. Based on the title alone though I was under no assumption that this film would put the subject matter into a positive light given the "Hell" part of the title, Will Allen (director) makes that clear from the get-go. Reference "Going Clear" or any other Scientology documentaries for examples of this.
What I do concede is that I didn't hear too much accountability from the participants. Hindsight is 20/20 and there was an admission of mutual benefit from the ordeal but I would have liked to hear some more accountability from the interviewees.
I'd like to be clear about 1 thing though: Andres (cult leader) created a cult (by definition and participant admission) and was a master manipulator and liar. Gay porn actor telling members NOT to engage in physical sexual desires all while having homosexual encounters with numerous young male members. That is the most appalling part of this film for me.
The only flaw I see in this film is not getting the "other side" i.e. Andres, current members, etc.
In the end, I feel that the participants of this film saw their time at Buddahfield with mixed emotions. They made many long- lasting friendships and gained much insight into themselves, after going through the cult-programming, and it appears they have come out much better for it. Isn't that what life's about? Learning from your mistakes and growing from them? I am sure most would have preferred a lief-lesson lasting less than 22 yrs and without the abortions, manipulations and semi-forced homosexual encounters.
Now You See Me 2 (2016)
Exciting But Majorly Flawed and Utterly Ridiculous!
If David Blaine, David Copperfield and Michael Bay made a film, it would be this.
The first film was cool: lots of flashy slight-of-hand, misdirection and stage magic that were slightly plausible in an "Oceans 11" kind of way. This poorly-written sequel is so full of holes and over-the-top illusions it borders on science fiction. The extra backstories just muddy the waters and the unnecessary addition of extra A-listers doesn't add to the story.
This films ties up some loose ends that you didn't realize existed from the first film and attempts to leave room for future films.
Magi (2016)
Beware of FAKE Reviews
You know what film is an 8/10 or a 9/10? Wolf of Wallstreet. You know what film is not? Magi.
Yet, judging by all of the high star ratings and glowing reviews, you'd think this film may win an Oscar. Wrong. Fake reviews....they are plaguing IMDb.
Many of these reviewers have ONLY reviewed ONE FILM (This film!)
Note to fake reviewers: at least pump in a few reviews for other films so you can appear to be a film fan and not affiliated with the film you are reviewing.
If anyone involved in the film (aka the fake reviewers) is reading this, please take note: YOU ARE RUINING IMDb! It has become a biased, fictitious ratings-land where the average consume cannot get an objective review of a film.
My suggestion: move along to a film that stands on its own merit and doesn't need to trick you into viewing.
Viral (2016)
Expecting Better From Blumhouse
I will pretty much watch Any major studio horror release but this film left a lot to be desired.
"Extinction"(2015) had a semi- original plot with great acting. "Afflicted"(2013) had a smaller budget with a great story.
This film was lacking all those qualities and seemed utterly predictable and boring. Viral, zombie-like parasitic outbreak in a small town, area quarantined as the zombie/virus/parasite people rum rampant. "30 Days of Night" did this MUCH better and "Contacted" (2013) had a much more likable cast.
I also saw Multiple stolen elements, mainly from the TV show "The Strain" as well as an "I Am Legend" scene (spoiler: towards the end when they're huddled in The dark room)
The ending was BRUTAL too.
All-in-all it's watchable but not very enjoyable. I wouldn't spend money to see this.
Numb (2015)
BEWARE - Fake Reviews
Buyer beware: I wouldn't trust anyones review whose ONLY activity is related to the movie they're reviewing,
Are these "fake" people? No. Are they all associated with the production of the movie? No Did they come to this page organically to review a movie of their own choosing? No.
I've been to movie premiers where they ask you to review them favorably on IMDb.
I politely decline, and so should you if you weren't planning on reviewing it before.
The movie is not bad.
My rating is objective.
The Unfolding (2016)
Lots of FAKE reviews here
All of these favorable reviews were posted within days of the films release (March 14th 2016) and many claim to be from England (filming location of movie) Many of these reviewers have ONLY reviewed ONE FILM! (This one) All of these reviewers gave this film AT LEAST 8 stars.
If anyone involved in the film (aka the fake reviewers) is reading this, please take note: YOU ARE RUINING IMDb! It has become a biased, fictitious ratings-land where the average consume cannot get an objective review of a film.
My suggestion: move along to a film that stands on its own merit and doesn't need to trick you into viewing.
Embedded (2012)
Old-School gore + No CGI Monster = Embedded
Here's why I like embedded: They showed the "monster" and LOTS of it.
No CGI or grainy, corner-of-your-eye, "did I see that?" monster. This was an old-school, man-in-a-suit Monster.
Sure, it looked like a super-sized Fraggle Rock reject but it's difference from the typical Bigfoot representation was stark and refreshing.
Embedded gets it's name from the cable news duo sent to document and report on a Montana towns' run-in with a rabid animal in the woods
The film gets going fast and once it's off, there's no stopping it. The camera work is shaky (surprised?) and the gore is high but appearance (and constant re-appearance) of the monster is what sets it apart from the rest.
Add this one to the top of the Monster Found Footage movie list.
Apocalyptic (2014)
Fresh Addition to Found Footage Family
The great thing about Chinese food is that you don't have to work very hard to eat it (or at least I don't). I just begin to shovel food in my face.
I was very glad I picked up Chinese food before sitting down to watch Apocalypse because I was so glued to the screen for the last 20 minutes I didn't even realize the bowl was empty.
I'm assuming some people will draw similarities between "Apocolypse" and Ti Wests "The Sacrament" (both based on cults and both released this year) and those similarities are many. However "Apocolypse" is a grittier, more realistic-feeling interpretation of what I think it would look like inside a Doomsday Cult.
While researching "The Sacrament" I kept seeing references to the real life Jonestown Massacres (loosely based upon it?) and that took away some of the mystery for me while watching the film. With "Apocolypse" I had no such pre-conceived notions and therefore was genuinely enthralled by the film and it's surprises
The phrase "shoestring budget" is mentioned on a few websites when I was researching this film I think it was filmed in a very short amount of time with a minuscule amount of money but YOU COULD NOT TELL!
This film looks as good as any major motion picture FoundFootage film out there (Devils Due, Delivery, PA). Even the small details of the film are pretty fantastic, down to the hand-made animal skin shoes the women wear.
Its refreshing for a horror film not to rush and shove the gore in your face. Apocolyptic takes its time and, like a good campfire, uses it's kindling to feed the progression of a growing fire of suspense.
The only downside was the lack of character development of the Cult leader: A Creepy, frail, pale, bald-headed, white-robed re-incarnation of Jesus (supposedly) I wanted to know more about him and really understand why these people worshiped him. The premise of the film revolves around him and his followers but I didn't really feel his charm or charisma come through the screen.
Aside from the similarities to "The Sacrament" I found this a wholly fresh take on the Found Footage trope.