Too Late The Hero

Just watched this one, from a FREE DVD with The Mail on Sunday.

For a free film, it's pretty good. Directed by Robert Aldrich who also made The Dirty Dozen, it follows a similar kind of idea, rag-tag-reject group of soldiers, this time British + an American officer, also rag-tag-reject, sent out on a pretty much suicide mission.

Michael Caine delivers a good performance as the squad's medic, although the film itself, while good, isn't great, watchable, a typical Sunday afternoon BBC2 movie.

Too Late The Hero - 6/10

Casino Royal (2006)

Pierce Brosnan is dead! Long live Daniel Craig!!

Ok, Brosnan isn't actually dead, but I think you get my point! Let me get this out of the way first...

a) I despise Pierce Brosnan (obviously not on a personal level but as an.. "actor">

b) Daniel Craig is the best Bond since Connery. Period.


Shout and scream at me all you like for either point, but that's my feelings. Now I went and saw this the other day at the Odeon West End, and thus paid the price of a small car for my ticket, popcorn and 7-up (of which there was only a choice of large and massive), so I was damn well hoping for a good film. At least I was giving my savings away for a 145min film!

Ok, price rant over, 145mins is a bit King Kong (go cockney!), and suffers from a similar problem as LOTR:ROTK, in that it gets to the end, 2/3 of the way through the film. I'm sat there thinking; "this is a soppy ending for a Bond film", only to remember that there hasn't been the Venice bit that's in the trailers and that everyone keeps talking about.

I was apprehensive about CR, but not because of Mr. Craig, but Martin Campbell the director, who also directed Goldeneye, the painful introduction to "Pierce Bond", while Goldeneye is one of the better Brosnan era films, it's still not that great.

Apart from the length issue and the pacing in certain parts, this film kicks ass, literally. It's hard-bloody-core. No messing about, the few "Bond-quips" that are in there are darker than before and Craig is electrifying, the man is simply just one big bit of testosterone fueled muscle, the amount of screen presence that man has, without trying, is phenomenal.

I liked Craig in Munich, I have to say I haven't seen Layer Cake, so this was the first time I've sen him in a leading role (I will be renting Layer Cake this weekend hopefully) and as Bond he is brilliant! No messing about, hard as nails and yet still has the "Bond-feel" which I felt was so lacking in the Pierce Bland films.

i say he's the best since Connery, because obviously Connery was the first and will always be the "ultimate" bond.

If you forgive the film's bloated running time, the slight soppyness (although somewhat justified), product placement (not as bad as The Island) and (although I need to check this) the fact that this is the start of Bond's career as a '00' and didn't Judy Dench's 'M' take over from the other one in story terms?? You'll love this film, a proper action movie, one of the best for a long time.

(Note to Broccoli's people: Jason Statham as a bad guy in the next one please.. goood God!)


Casino Royal 8/10

School Of Rock

"One good concert can change people's lives"....not this one!

Let's be honest, what's the fuss about Jack Black, he's not that great, this film, supposedly one of his best, is simply bland, it has the odd moment of humour, notably his derogatory name calling of the kids, but apart from that, it's simply a very average, light hearted film.

The resolution left me unsatisfied, not a great enough character change for my liking, being that I never really liked his self-centered character, the kids were ok, but the whole thing was just wholly underwhelming.

You'd be better to watch Rock School with Gene Simmons, either series, than this.

School Of Rock 5/10

Pan's Labyrinth (El Laberinto del Fauno)

Hello Guillermo!

My introduction to Guillermo Del Toro was through Mimic, although at the time I didn't really know who he was, I took more notice after Blade 2, then went on to watch Hellboy, then The Devil's Backbone and now his latest piece Pan's Labyrinth.

Pan's is far more along the lines of Backbone than the others I mentioned, it's a fantastical story of a young girl, Ofelia, who finds out she is a princess from an underground realm, set against the backdrop of the latter days of the Spanish civil war, she must perform a series of tasks to prove that she still has her 'spirit' and can return to her kingdom.

Much like Backbone, it's really told from the child's perspective, and I can't see that it would've worked in any other way. It's dark, violent and emotional and although a little slow in places, yet again an amazing film from one of the modern masters of cinema.

Pan's Labyrinth 9/10

Chopper

It’s taken me ages to get around to watching this, literally ages. I kept seeing it in the shops, umming and aahing over whether to get it or not, even dirt cheap, then a few weeks back buckled and bought it.

A good decision.

Firstly, it’s entertaining, funny, gruesome, slightly slow in parts, but makes up for it in sheer wit alone.

Secondly, Eric Bana is one of the finest actors around at the moment and this, which I believe was the role to break him into the film world, just goes to further reinforce that fact.

Immediately I likened Bana’s role in this to that of Christian Bale’s Patrick Bateman in American Psycho, whilst tonally different films, the level the characters are at is very similar, struggling with their psychosis (I make no claim that that is the right word, but hopefully you get what I mean), flipping through moods like a rolodex, blistering performances from both of them.

Chopper is a blinding film, one of the best Aussie films I’ve seen to date, so go and watch it now!

Chopper – 9/10

Taxi 3

I’m a big fan of the previous two instalments of this series (I’ve thus far ignored the American remake!!).

What they are, are simple good fun action-comedy movies, at times cutting very close to the bone with humour that you simply wouldn’t see in a British or American film.

As per usual it starts in much the same way with a practically vomit inducing ride in Daniel’s uber-taxi, this follows and forms part of an unexpected cameo appearance.

There’s a lot of ‘technical’ or ‘reality’ errors in this film (as with the other two), you’ll se what I mean, but at the same time, you just don’t care, the whole thing is ridiculous, and these ‘errors’ are perfectly acceptable.

It’s a proper buddy movie, sentimental, comical and fun, something which is lacking in most of the movies that Hollywood’s churning out at the mo.

If you want a stupid, fun film (or three) watch Taxi.

Taxi 3 – 8/10

X-Men: The Last Stand

Now I like my comic book films, I like comic books (although I've not got into the X-Men comics), and I liked the first two X-Men movies directed by Bryan Singer.

For X3, Brett Ratner takes over the reigns and you can tell, the simple thing is to say "all action, no soul", even when killing people off and having our heroes cry about it, there's still something lacking.

The effects are pretty good, although you can tell more focus has been put on them than the characters themselves, and thus they don't have the impact that they should've had.

The script's pretty weak. I've listened to the Creative Screenwriting Podcast where they did a Q&A with Simon Kinberg and Zak Penn the writers, (Zak who also worked on X2 with the aforementioned Mr Singer) and even they sounded disappointed with how it turned out. Clearly without Singer's guidance, what made the X-Men films good has been lost.

Now the film was entertaining enough, but it was slow and trundled along in places, people waffling away, even themselves seeming at times disinterested in the (slowly) unfolding events.

There was no character growth that I noticed at least, something you'd expect from the third film in a franchise with recurring characters, Wolverine seemed a little weak and simply there for the wisecracks (which doesn't bode well for the Brett Ratner directed Wolverine spin-off), Storm was just plain dull, Magneto (played by the ever brilliant Ian McKellan) was probably as good as the other two, but had a line "what have I done", clearly thrown in for the American audience as a facial expression would've done the trick far better.

Some of the newer characters, Ice Man (forgive me if that's not his proper name) et al were quite good, we'll try and forget about Vinnie Jones' shocking Juggernaught though :/

By the end of the film, I was glad it was over but at the same time, the mushed together ending was far too saccharin laced and left far too many questions un-answered, but not in a "good-cliffhanger-way", more in a "doh-forgot-to-write/film-that-way"

God help us for X4, Wolverine and Magneto :/

X-Men : The Last Stand : 5/10

The Protector

More cheese penguin? This film is ladled with it...and it's damn good fun!!

Tony Jaa, the Thai bastard lovechild of Jackie Chan (who makes a humorous cameo) and Bruce Lee, kicks more ass in the follow up to his bone breaking..breakthru movie Ong-Bak (also bloody good).

Now I was watching the un-subtitled version, so mostly Thai, some sporadic Aussie and oddly enough English accented dialoge and apart from the odd lengthy dialogue and exposition scene, I could pretty much follow what was going on, depsite the really bad cutting, but then it's a martial arts action flick, not a David Lynch mind-fuck.

Basically Mr Jaa, has his elephant nicked and he has to go to Sydney to kick ass and get it back.

If you like martial arts movies (proper ones, not the ponce like Crouching Tiger..) you'll heartily enjoy this!


The Protector - 7/10

Silent Hill

Apparently this is regarded as a horror movie. I don't feel that it is.

It is in fact a complete load of stinking toss. Badly written, badly acted, badly directed, bad CG, some truly cringe-worthy CG in fact, including a shockingly bad virtual camera move when Rose first explores the town.

The plot makes bugger all sense, eg. if you reach the end of a film and say out loud "WHAT?!..Like what the hell was that all about", then it can't be good*

Apparently Christophe Gans (dir.) is supposed to be some sort of visual genius, and while I haven't seen any of his other work, said genius wasn't demonstrated here, I was expecting to be impressed by the ever smouldering town and was completely underwhlemed, but it's poor CG "enhanced" nature.

The townsfolk were laughable, properly so to the extent of several scenes conjouring up visions in my mind of Monty Python and The Holy Grail ("SHE'S A WITCH!")

For the sake of that couple of ours or whatever it is. AVOID.

Silent Hill - 0/10 (I'd even give wolf creek a 2)



*My personal exception to this rule is Miike Takashi's "Ichi The Killer", which made absolutely no sense to me, but I loved it, partly because of that, most Japanese stuff doesn't make sense to us lot over here.

The Devil's Backbone

Apparently this is regarded as a horror movie. I don't feel that it is.

Now I don't mean that in a derogitory sense, simply that it doesn't strike me as a horror. It's a ghost story yes, but not in the same way that say Poltergeist is, playing it solely for scares, but I felt that the ghost element is merely superficial to the rest of the story.

Set in an orphanage in Spain during their civil war, the story follows Carlos, the new kid, he soon discovers that things are not quite right in his new place of residence and starts to uncover dark secrets.

Overall this is a brilliant piece of storytelling mainly Guillermo del Toro is a hell of a storyteller! Next up for me of his Cronos, unless of course I end up watching Pan's Labyrinth beforehand, which bearing in mind how many films I've seen recently is perfectly feasible.

El Espinazo del Diablo, is widely regarded as Guillermo's best film, in the special features, Guillermo himself says that it's the first one he was actually happy about, it's certainly better than Mimic, better than Hellboy, although in a totally different class, and as to which I'd watch again in a hurry, Hellboy snags it, but technically Backbone is the better film.


El Espinazo del Diablo (The Devil's Backbone) - 9/10

Shallow Grave

"Don't tell me you're not tempted?!"

It's surprising to think that Danny Boyle actually made good films once upon a time, but yes he did and this is one of them.

This is my second viewing of this film, I can't remember the last time I watched it, and I couldn't really remember much of it then..except the quote from Ewan McGregor's character above.

Simply, Shallow Grave is one of the best British films I've seen, the writing is bwilyant (sorry ;), the acting is top notch, even Keith Allen keeps himself under control, even though he's only got a small part.

It looks low budget, it feel slow budget, it kinda reminds you that Britain really only has about 10 actors to go around, and it does feel a tad dated with the hardcore techno opening music, although technically, the fast moving streets against the slow woods, is quite nice, but it's a damn good film.

Funny, edgy, and kinda scary as it progresses, you can certainly see why Ewan and Christopher Eccleston went on to become Obi-Wan Kenobi and Dr. Who respectivly....well maybe not.

Shallow Grave - 8/10

Haze

I do not get this film!

Haze was a random HMV purchase, wanted to get something new, perused the world cinema sections and Haze caught my eye. I read the back and was hooked.

It's a Japanese film, of only around 49mins, from director Shinya Tsukamoto, who previously directed Tetsuo, which I've only seen once and remember it to be a horribly disturbing film at the time.

So, the film..

A man wakes up to find himself locked in a tiny, cramped concrete room, in which he can barely move. He doesn't remember why he is there and where he came from. He has a terrible stomach injury and is slowly bleeding to death.

(Taken from the synopsis by Anon on IMDb)

A brilliant idea, but I just don't get where it went. The film was creepy, really pushing the claustrophobia, (I had to turn the light on!), there's some horrible moments involving grinding but overall I just didn't know what the hell was going on by the end, no clearer than when it started.

However, I will be going back for a second viewing, it may just have been that it was late and I was tired and not trying to freak myself out before bed, but I am still intrigued.


Haze - 6/10

Munich

Took me a while to get around to seeing this, mainly cos every time I rented a film, i was with my girlfriend and she didn't want to see it (shitbag as she says). So she was away I wanted a film to watch, Munich was it.

It's a long film, and by the end you're feeling it, but as with most Spielberg epics, it's a pretty good ride. Hard going at times, little hammy in places, esp. near the end, but a precision made piece with the usual Spielbergian (?) lust for entertaining, despite the subject matter.

So, the subject matter concerns that of the Munich Massacre, the deaths of members of the Israeli olympic team in the seventies (forgive me I forget the year), although, the kidnapping and deaths are shown, this film is more concerned with Israel's response to the events and the subsequent retribution dished out but a group of "specialist" assasins, led by Avner (Eric Bana).

Bana in this is amazing! I put the occasional hammyness down to the script rather than his performance, Daniel Craig, as the South African, Steve also puts in a good performace, despite a wandering accent.

The ending was a tad disappointing for me, but I get the point of it. The intensity seemed to be a little watered down throughout, possibly because of the tones and nature of the lighting, or more probably the lack of power in the script again.

Overall it's an ok film, long but good performances and some good sequences.


Munich - 7/10

Crooked Features

The British low budget film industry is massive, there are countless films made every year, from shorts to features, documentaries, promos..what is done big budget is also done low budget.

The key to low budget film-making is knowing your limits, the film you produce is not gonna look like a film that Jerry Bruckheimer has produced. When I say knowing your limits, it's more knowing the scope you have within those limits and how best to exploit them.

This film knows that inside out. I've literally just finished watching it and I reccommend you head over to HERE and purchase yourselves of a copy right now! (You can finish reading this when you've placed your order).

Let me say first off that I know the director Mike Peter Reed (a little at least), he was the Sound Recordist on my short that was filmed recently and my copy of his film came included in the package with the sound rushes. Secondly I'm not giving him a thumbs up review because of that, I genuinely enjoyed this film!!

So what's it about? Basically (i say that too much), porn director Rod Shuffler (Julian Lee) after recieving his third SHAFTA for Lifetime Achievement, sets out to go mainstream, however things are not meant to be that easy!!...

Filmed as a mockumentary (a-la-Spinal Tap etc), it follows the cast and crew of "Attack Of The Clowns" as they wade their way through the production.

The key players are brilliant, natural and most impotantly funny! Pano Masti, who plays David Goliath and Kate Naughton who plays tortured First Assistant Director Tanya Hyde steal the show completely.

Although, the whole mockumentary format has been uber-exploited since Spinal Tap and more so since the advent of DV filmmaking (god know's I've got a couple of mockdoc scripts myself!), this film does the job far better than others I've seen.

You have to accept the production values before you sit down to this. It's low budget, DV, documentary style, if you accept that you'll enjoy it. It may appeal more to filmmakers because of the subject matter, but then maybe I'm being a little hard on non-filmmakers who would probably enjoy this. The best viewers for this are the ones who know their films (and in some places music, eg: the scene with David and Sandy in the car!!).

It's a very geeky film, there are references littered throughout, even to the extent of a Tie Fighter sound subtly thrown in for good measure. It's these little touches that make it shine and the sorts of things that made me choke on my drink.

Cheers Mike :)

Crooked Features - 9/10

Inside Man

Firstly, let me apologise for the gap between posts here, the reason for it, is that I've been busy busy working on my own short film (lookoutfilm.blogspot.com), but I have a little respite so...


Inside Man, a Spike Lee joint. Now I don't like Spike Lee's stuff, his films are usually "message" films, preaching or ranting about racial issues, and while in itself that's fine, I'm not having a go at him making films of that nature, they just don't appeal to me, so it was with some trepidation (?) that I sat down to watch his latest offering.

Also, Clive Owen is a tad hit and miss (eg. Sin City & King Arthur), Denzel Washington is usually a big old piece of ham, so this film, didn't have a lot going for it other than it looked kinda interesting.

So...I really enjoyed it, it was funny (Denzel's ham worked quite well, although Willem Dafoe steals most of the scenes he's in), and it was clever, once I got used to the Without A Trace/Cold Case (et al) esque, TV style cutting back and fwd between the heist and police interviews, I settled in to a very enjoyable film.

Owen is very good in this, although I have a nasty feeling that it's because you can't see his expressionless face through most of it, the premise although slightly confusing and, yes, still a little preachy, is a good one, a clever ending and someone's (scriptwriter I guess) clearly spent a lot of time thinking the whole heist through.

Jodie Foster is good, but still irritating (I think she's still in Flightplan mode), Chiwetel Ejiofor, is a good side for Denzel and as far as performances go, his is better.

My girlfriend hated it, she was bored to tears as was her mum, but then rarely do they like the same films as me anyway, but the film is long, it probably could've done with being a tad shorter, but I felt at least, that the pace is well kept thoughout.

Not a masterpiece, but an entertaining ride, which is what I was hoping for.

Inside Man - 7/10

Superman Returns

It took me too attempts to watch this one. The cinema had a power cut on the first attempt (at a rather apt moment in the film), so i had to wait for a few days then go back for a second attempt, which was well, well worth it!

Bryan Singer, shot to fame with The Usual Suspects, which in itself is a brilliant film, kinda dissapeared for a bit, then directed X-Men, HELLO! and welcome back big budget superhero movies!

A few years down the line and we have Superman Returns, set five years after Superman II and thankfully before III & IV, astronomers discovered the remains of Krypton so Supes obviously had to go and have a lookie. So five years later he returns, and funnily enough things have changed, Lois has a fiance and a kid, Lex Luthor's out of prison and the world's pretty much gone to shit. This he finds a little upsetting, but not to be out-done (after all he's Superman!) he sets out to put things straight.

Lex Luthor (Kevin Spacey) is on top form, hammy, over the top, and the "WRONG!" bit even made me jump slightly, despite being in the trailer. He is doing his usual world conquering stuff and Supes has to stop him.

I really REALLY enjoyed this film, just perusing the IMDb comments, there's a lot of slagging off going on, but then that's to be expected on there, it's vary rare for anyone on there to say anything nice! But then that's a different post (maybe I'll stick it on my blog).

Brandon Routh is pretty good as the big S and the same sized C, I can see the similarities with the late Christopher Reeve's interpretation of the character, but that to me is not a big deal. It's widely known that Singer directly referenced and homaged Donner's original vision, so of course they're gonna be similar! But still he makes the role his own, which I for one could see and was greatful for.

Kate Bosworth, well, I think someone slightly more mature looking at least would've felt better, but then Routh's not exactly old either.

The film's long, but doesn't really feel it, there's a couple of scenes that drag a little, but overall the pace was good, the actions scenes are as you'd expect from a film of this type, one particular Supes/Lex et al scene is positively brutal and is something I wasn't expecting but feel it really added to the film and is the sort of thing that is what brings this up to date.

As much as it pains me to say, as I've never really been a big Superman fan, I think it's taken the top spot in my list of fave super hero movies, knocking Spider-Man 1 & 2 into joint second.


Superman Returns - 9/10

Twelve Monkeys

Out of all the Terry Gilliam films I've seen, this is without a doubt the best. Note that this review is from what is probably my third or fouth viewing, but it still stands up as a very good film.

Twelve Monkeys is a grimy tale of time travel, with so many "time-travel-theory-holes" it hurts, but they're not ones that detract from the story in any way, why, because the sheer depth of detail that Gilliam is reknowned (?) for keeps you so wrapped up in the narrative that you don't care.

Bruce Willis plays Cole, a prisoner who's volunteered to go and collect samples and information to try and find the pure strain of a virus that wiped out most of the human race in 1996.

Obviously the whole 1996 thing is the only point that sticks out as we're now ten years later and most of the planet is still here. (Much like 2001...I haven't seen and H.A.L. 9000's on ebay recently) But again, you don't care. Bruce Willis is well.. Bruce Willis, Brad Pitt is in probably the best role I've ever seen him in playing the deranged Jeffrey Goines, Madeline Stowe...who?

I watched this on DVD, and the best bit about that is "The Hamster Factor and Other Tales Of Twelve Monkeys", which is basically the making of doc, but just goes to show exactly how mental Gilliam really is.

Genius

Twelve Monkeys - 8/10
The Hamster Factor and Other Tales Of Twelve Monkeys - 10/10

Sideways

This film has been regarded as one of the best comedies of last year, it won several awards and recieved critical acclaim.

It's boring, it's sooooo long, yes there are some funny bits in it, Thomas Haden Church is quite good and I'm now even more curious to see what he's like in Spider-Man 3, but overall I was distinctly underwhelmed by what I was expecting to be a highly entertaining film.

It's just dull and far far too long. Which kinda contridicts this rather short comment on it.

Sideways - 4/10

Over The Hedge

Hey, SUPERMAN'S OUT! So I went and saw Over The Hedge with my grilfriend :/ well I did agree weeks beforehand and to be fair, it wasn't a total loss.

OTH (as it will now be referred to as) is an animated feature from Dreamworks, creators of Shrek, Shark Tale et al. It's about RJ a racoon (voiced by Bruce Willis), who in his racoony ways, upsets a big old bear (Nick Nolte) and ends up having to get all the bear's stuff back or he'll get eaten. So he comes across a group of woodland creatures who awake from hibernation to find that their woodland has been developed into a housing estate (or whatever the American term is), struggling to find food for the coming winter, RJ offers a "solution"...

So, as most people know, depsite the success of Shrek, Madagascar (say it like an American), they're still no Pixar, why?

Well the thing that really struck me with OTH was that it's technically really good, technically in the sense of achieveing really good depth of field, nice virtual camera movement, fluid animation (bear in mind I'm not an animator here!), the humans looked a bit ropey, but all in all it had a good cartoon feel and looked a hell of a lot better than the afformentioned square-fest that was Madagascar.

But then that's the point.

I didn't watch Finding Nemo and marvel at the CGI water, I didn't watch Monsters Inc. and fawn over Sulley's fur (although both of which were duly admired on a second viewing), I was too busy being wrapped up in the characters and the story, this is where Pixar has the edge (I have yet to see Cars and have heard mixed views).

OTH has some good laugh out loud funny bits, mainly down to Hammy, who's your token funny guy for the film (much like Scrat in Ica Age), but I found myself slouching in my cinema seat, admiring the focus pulls rather than being involved in the story.

Mark Kermode said of Ice Age 2, that it signified the death of narrative cinema, OTH has a narrative, it's just not that great. Fun but forgettable.

Oh yeah, who the hell is Garry Shandling?!?

Over The Hedge - 5/10

The Hills Have Eyes (1977 & 2006)

Science fiction double feature!!...well horror double feature actually.

Yesterday I watched the remake of Wes Craven's "The Hills Have Eyes", what i thought I'd do here is give my views on both that and the original that I watched just before I started doing this blog. Talk about value for money eh?!

The Hills Have Eyes (1977)

This is one of THE iconic horror movies of the 70's. Written and directed by one of the new wave of horror directors, Wes Craven.

Being that this film is so iconic, I was hoping for a damn good ride, however having not been that impressed with the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre, I was preparing myself for a let down.

Where id it come in? About half way I guess. It was a reasonable film, you can see the influences it has had on subsequent horror film makers (Wolf Creek for example), but at the same time it was just a bit dull. I can see how it would've shocked people when it was released, it has a bit of gore, deformed inbreds, cannibalism, etc. but it just doesn't have the impact any more, at least not with my "desensitized" upbringing.

The boy of the family comes across as a whiney over-actor, which is slightly off putting, the best characters being the unlikely protagonist of the big-brother-in-law and of course the always wonderful Michael Berryman.

Overall, depsite my trying to be prepared for the worst, I still felt a bit let down by another of these classic horrors, when am I going to be scared, when am I going to be unsettled and freaked out by one of these?

Suggestions on a postcard (or comments below) please.

The Hills Have Eyes (1977) - 5/10

-------------------------

The Hills Have Eyes (2006)

Right, now with the remake. Any better, Any worse?

To be perfectly honest with you, I actually preferred this one. (now ready to receive the abuse from purists and Mark Kermode)

Don't get me wrong this isn't a masterpiece and I still wasn't scared and I also agree with Dr Kermode on the fact that the whole new backstory isn't nessecary.

It goes on too long, I missed the family aspect of the "savages" which didn't seem as prevalent in this version, mostly though, it's a shot for shot remake of the original.

It maintains much the same pacing, the main story's the same, the family characters remain pretty much the same except the boy is much less whiney and big-bro..well, he's why I prefer this version.

The sheer amazing cheesyness they've injected with his character is nothing short of entertainment brilliance! When he gets going, leading up to the "climax" (it's not that big a crescendo), her undergoes a radical change, partially justified, but also a tad out of place, however, that makes the movie for me, forget the gory deaths of the family members, forget the underlying message about the savagery of man (not so subtly delivered in this version), Big Bro + end sequence, that's what this film is all about. Than and a bit in the opening sequence, which while still doesn't match Ghost Ship as an opening, is still pretty fun. Well done Mr Aja!

The Hills Have Eyes (2006) - 6/10