Author: Verse

Old Henry (2021) 5/5

Old Henry feels like a throwback to rarely seen westerns. It lacks a lot of flash and for some that could feel as tired as Henry himself feels, but I think this western works so well because it keeps things simple.

Tim Blake Nelson gives an amazing performance, capturing a look and feel that sells the character. The supporting cast is no slouch either.

If anyone has patience for an economical story like this, then they will not regret it. The director and writer, Potsy Ponciroli, is someone to look out for. This is a movie that could bridge the gap between grandmas wanting to watch their westerns and the modern movie goer.

10 Reasons to Play Spartacus: A Game of Blood and Treachery

I cannot begin to describe how much I enjoy Spartacus. It is the opposite of the kind of joined hands I normally love; if there is an opposite to cooperation, then this is it. Lie and scheme your way to victory, or to nearly ending your relationship.

That all being said, it is a hard game to come by if you are a completionist. You will either have to work hard to find the original edition and its expansions, or try for the newer 2020 version that is identical except in its artwork and having not had the expansions released yet. Without further delay, lets discuss…

Reason #1: Wagers

Place your bets!

You can bet on fights, even if you are not involved. You can even take the risky bet that someone is decapitated for a 2 to 1 return!

Read more

Alien Resurrection (1997) 2/5

Whedon does not get a pass for this. I had to search for this, he commented that the movies script was mostly intact but the direction was bad. Then he commented the casting was bad later. Everything was bad except his script.

Don’t get me wrong, the direction is extra bad and there are bits where you could see the writers intent vs what we got, but its bad. A tone correction to pronouncing fork would not have fixed this mess. I don’t think this would have been a Serenity, and I don’t think jokes about Walmart show any appreciation for the setting. Whedon is not one to take blame though, clearly.

It is amazing how many recognizable faces are in this and yet how squandered it all is. Whedon complained about typcasting but I think actors who know how to play a type is a small issue in the grand scheme. Winona Ryder is the only one who seems to struggle a bit, with any other issues being down to directors interpretation of scenes. That direction will definitely be noticeable though, as at the time the director did not speak english and I believe this is why jokes are often said loudly or seriously.

There are just far too many nonsense things that happen and make no sense. Also, basketball. In general though, it feels as though Whedon didn’t really get what came before. Established things are not taken seriously, like if a face-hugger gets on you all the way then you probably aren’t getting it off.

Being brave with a series isn’t the worst. A franchise like Scream has suffered from beating the same drum over and over again in my opinion. I think the idea of injecting more humor, as the script seemed to want to do, isn’t necessarily wrong. The first movie was horror, then action, then whatever the third was (worse action?), and this could have been a blend or some such. It needs to respect the foundations though, and it struggles to find any footing.

Alien 3 (1992) 2.5/5

It feels as though the movie thinks it is returning to the darker themes of Alien, opposed to Aliens, but I think it comes across more as a washy action flick and does not really evoke the heights of either of its predecessors.

I love Fincher’s movies, but I think fans giving him a pass like he did not have a part in this is a bit too easy. I think a lot of minds came together and made a meh movie, and an especially bad one in the context of what came before.

People get fixated on the opening story decision, but I think it is dismissive to think that is the only problem here.

That all being said, there is some good. Some new characters are interesting and there are a couple of iconic shots in the flick. Sets are attractive and on occasion distinct.

It never reaches any height though, and that just feels bad.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master (1988) 1.5/5

I cannot be bothered to do more than a list with this one.

-Tuesday Knight is a big downgrade from Patricia Arquette as Kristen Parker from the prior film.
-Wasted the prior cast. They should have just moved on or focused on the actual returning actors.
-A step back in acting.
-It feels super reductive to go back to the mother undermining things again.
-Lazy work. No room rotation when you expect it and unsmooth jumps in camera work throughout.
-Some really bad deaths, very lazy.
-Revisiting the doubt from everyone is lame and makes no sense after characters acknowledge they know the story, like it is more common knowledge that odd stuff happened.
-Passing powers is stupid.
-Our man, Fred, is not very scary here.
-Wounds don’t manifest in the real world. They established in the last movie that they did, its why Fred had to make it look like some of them were hurting themselves before. It is a lazy way to perpetuate everyones doubt this time.
-The Dream Master stuff is dumb and heavy handed.
-The dojo stuff. Why invisible? Why does it only reflect the kids personality and not also Fred’s? This was so dumb.
-“Daydream” scene is dumb. I would have accepted micronapping.

Blah, I say. Blah.

A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987) 3.5/5

Dream Warriors is not perfect. If I spoke to any diehard fan of the series, I bet they would give me grief for liking this more than the first. Yes the first flick has a darker tone and Fred feels scarier, but it is also wildly inconsistent in quality. As this is my first time running through all of the movies, I have only seen 1, 2, and 3 so far, but I recall the first had some of the very best scenes and also things like oatmeal stairs, prop dummy mom, and a lot of awkward running.

Three is an imperfect movie that is consistently imperfect. It only goes a bit far with the expansion of the origin, but it was not so bad as to feel ruinous like a lot of the second movie was.

Oh and “dream deprivation” is a phrase nobody should ever say. The extra camp though? If we can forgive the silly budget stuff in the first movie then a Jason and the Argonauts style fight at the junkyard is hardly something to fuss about. Plus I like the idea more than what we got in two, it felt as if he wasn’t strong enough to fully materialize but could basically mess with the environment some. Oh and the wizard stuff? It made sense for that character, as they were giving all of the kids some sort of identity and he was a fellow dork.

I am going to be in a small crowd, but I kind of like Dream Warriors the most so far.

A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984) 3/5

A Nightmare on Elm Street trips over a lot of rough acting and disproportional responses by characters. Also there is no way all *that part* happened in the span of 10 minutes.

Some effects do not work at all, like stepping into bowls of oatmeal or the terrible door-pull, but they are sparse. The worst offenders take place anytime anyone is running anywhere. I don’t think Wes Craven knew what running is supposed to look like or how silly it looked having supernatural Freddy sorta-trip over a trash can that wasn’t really in the way. The boobytrap stuff also feels silly and wrecks the tone a bit. That all being said, Freddy is a presence to be afraid of and genre defining moments shine even by modern expectations.

It is easy to see how A Nightmare on Elm Street is significant to film as a whole.