Review - Sharknado - (2013 - Dir. Anthony C. Ferrante)

I had relatively high hopes for Sharknado. A friend had recommended it, saying that it was completely stupid but fun. Sounds like my cup of tea.

I had visions of tornados. Tornados filled with sharks. Maybe the first one that sweeps past our characters could contain some small sharks - maybe a pale catshark or two? - causing some minor nipping. Nothing that Salvon couldn't cope with (is there anything that Savlon can't cope with?). As this tornado moved on, more would appear containing larger and more violent sharks. Hammerheads, bull sharks and tigersharks would all make an appearance. Finally in the largest tornado - one that would whip your pants off you from a mile away - the great white sharks would appear causing pointy toothed mayhem.

I was expecting it to be cheap, but I thought that this would be offset by some sparkling creativity and ingenuity. There surely must be some great shark/tornado related kills, I thought. Sharks whipping past people in the wind and whisking them away for some chompy chomp? Or taking a cheeky bite out of someone as they pass? The possibilities are huge and surely this is where the majority of the time writing the film should have been spent.

Sharknado is nothing like what I thought it would be. My hopes dropped rapidly when I saw that it was a Syfy presentation and that The Asylum were also involved. But even so I gave it a chance. Sadly, I needn't have bothered. A fair proportion of the running time is spent looking at the characters sat in a car that is obviously in a studio/the producer's garage, driving away from tornados. To be fair they do mix it up a bit to create some visual interest, they get in a helicopter. A fair few shots of a studio bound helicopter follow. It's pretty dull stuff.

There is some slight entertainment value at times. I raised an appreciative eyebrow when a huge Ferris wheel chased our heroes down a street. There are some minor moments of tension too, but they're few and far between.

Out of the kills, I can only remember two, both chainsaw related. They are completely preposterous but that's fine in this type of film. The problem is the completely uninventive way they chose to shoot them. I know it's a low budget production but they didn't even try to solve any problems creatively (for good examples of this try Manborg and the classic The Evil Dead). Way more ingenuity is shown by people inspired to make fancy dress costumes.

For once, this could have done with being a mega-budget blockbuster, like Twister with added sharks and death. The stupidity of the (admittedly brilliant) premise could have done with the excesses of 3D, CGI, an 18 certificate and ridiculously paid film stars. It could have been a gloriously stupid fun-filled shark/breeze fest. But no. The gore is tame and the closest it gets to film stars are Tara Reid (big deal, but watching her stare at a hedgecutter for ages has to be one of the funniest bits of the film by far) and John Heard, the dad from Home Alone. Heard is the only cast member with any personality and gravitas, so it's a shame when he leaves the film at such an early juncture.

You may have noticed that I've not even bothered giving a plot synopsis to whet your appetite. Let's face facts, it's obviously not worth my time writing it or your time reading it. It's a shame but the idea, and screenshots, are way better than the actual film. Sharknado is a real missed opportunity and possibly for the first time ever I'm looking forward to the remake. 
3/10
evlkeith

If you like this you could also try:
Throwing a kipper into a headwind. 

Review - The Cave (2005 - Dir. Bruce Hunt)

I had some vague recollection of hearing bad things about this film. But I saw it in a '3 for £5' offer and decided to give it a chance. It could turn out to be one of those films that most people hate but is actually quite enjoyable.

Sadly, it's not. There are moments of fleeting excitement although they are few and far between. The overwhelming downside of The Cave is the lack of characterisation. To say that the characters all gaze in awe at Paper Mario's surfeit of dimensions is an understatement. It is a relatively easy task to write a description of every character in one word; 'relatively easy' because I can't even think of one word for some of them. 


Why did the film-makers bother then? The plot is an excuse for some lovely cave footage, both above and below water. And also an excuse to homage Aliens. A group of scientists led by Dr Nicolai (Marcel Iures) are investigating a Carpathian Cave system aided by tip-top diving brothers Jack and Tyler McAllister. They soon run into a spot of bother when a cave in occurs and Jack spouts the only cool blockbuster dialogue in the film - 'We are the rescue team.' More problems arise from the inclusion of some cave-dwelling creatures. 

The creatures were designed by Patrick Tatopoulus (Dark City, Pitch Black) and I was disappointed by their derivative nature. They recall the unfortunate alien/muppet hybrid from the conclusion of Alien: Resurrection. Having a better look at them in the special features, they are slightly more interesting with their exposed brains and elevated bone bike helmets (for want of a better phrase). The director chooses to show the creatures off by juddering the camera about and cutting rather quickly, rendering them indecipherable onscreen for much of the action.

When the action kicks off towards the end there is some fun to be had. The highlight has to be the free climbing sequence of Charlie (Piper Perabo). Admittedly it all gets a bit Lara Croft but this was the first time I got behind one of the characters. It was short-lived. 


I'm not a Professor of Sciencey Business BSc PhD but if a cave smells of methane there shouldn't be any flames in there. Fire of any kind would cause an explosion, surely? Later on in the film the cave blows up - I'm guessing it's the methane - so why don't the numerous fire ignite it earlier? Maybe they're special non-heating cold flames. The sort you use to cool yourself down on a hot day. That must be it.

At one point I was going to rate this as either 0 or 1. It does pick up in the latter half and provides some of the promised blockbuster thrills. Watch it for the cave photography and you may get something out of it.
3/10
evlkeith
 

If you like this you could also try:
The Descent, The Core, Pitch Black.

Review - Brotherhood of the Wolf (2001 - Dir. Christophe Gans)

Continuing our birthday celebrations we come to the final entry in our Mark Dacascos Season, and it is one of my favourite films of all time.

The idea of mixing the genres of kung fu, horror, mystery and period french drama, whilst adding a savage stonking great wolf as a garnish may seem a tad foolish. But it works stunningly well, making for one of the most refreshingly original films I've ever seen.


Naturalist (not naturist - that would have been one genre too many. I don't think wolves play volleyball anyway) Gregoire de Fronsac, played by Samuel Le Bihan is sent by the King to the small french province of Gevaudan, along with his native American sidekick Mani (Mark Dacascos). Numerous deaths have been occurring and they have been attributed to a rather large wolf. Fronsac and Mani investigate this general unpleasantness. And hit people a lot. So what we basically have is a berzerk version of Hound of the Baskervilles (not a bad thing).

Gans certainly loves his slow motion and Dacascos has never looked cooler. Forget his Straight-to-DVD actioners. This is what he is truly capable of. There are so many well choreographed fights. His assailants, in true kung fu fashion, take their turn, coming at Mani with fists and various weapons, but he just sorts them. No messing. The sound effects are excessively loud and crunchy, further adding to the stylised nature of the fights. Bihan also gets to do a fair bit of scrapping and is not too shabby in the 'hitting people hard' departpartment.

There is love interest in the form of the gorgeous Émilie Dequenne (The Pack) and Monica Bellucci (Irreversible), just enough to add yet another dimension to the film. Both female leads are great but Dequenne is so great she should get her own season. Now, there's a thought... 

You also get Vincent Cassel as a really creepy villain. He's always good value for money and doesn't let the side down here. Supposedly, he put in a lot of training for his fight sequence and it shows.

Let's get the one negative out of the way. Surprise, surprise, it's the CGI. The wolf looks ropey and a bit too light and lacking in contrast compared to the backgrounds for my liking. Saying that, the close-ups (by Henson) using a practical wolf are premium quality (again, surprise, surprise).

For a film to be so full of disparate elements and still be coherent and top fun is a testament to Gans' skill as a director. (It's a shame Onimusha fell through. That would have been a treat.) He brings out the best in Mark Dacascos (see Crying Freeman) and it would be great to see them work together again. So do the dodgy effects knock the rating down at all? For sheer audacity, I'll let it off.
10/10
evlkeith

(Please note: It's well worth getting the Blu-ray because with the DVD you are limited to a plain stereo soundtrack if you opt for the french language version, the 5.1 sound is only available on the useless dubbed version. The Blu-ray has got the proper full surround experience. Way better. And not smelly.)


If you like this you could also try:
Crying Freeman, Drive, The Pack, the 2002 BBC version of Hound of the Baskervilles.

Review - Rogue (2007 - Dir. Greg Mclean)

I saw this on holiday for the first time last year, when I was desperate for something half decent to watch. From the director of Wolf Creek, starring Radha Mitchell (Silent Hill) and Michael Vartan (Alias), it's about a great big stonking crocodile; what can go wrong?


Surprisingly, not a lot. It's another of those films that needs to be filed under 'far better than they have any right to be'. In the first part of the film, when Pete McKell (Vartan) sets off on a tourist boat down an outback river with Kate Ryan (Mitchell), it looks more like a nature documentary and includes some beautiful photography. The director obviously loves the region. Then in comes the crocodile...


The group of tourists gets trapped by a rather large crocodile on a small island, that is rapidly being flooded due to the tidal nature of the river. Mclean knows how to keep the tension up in various scenes throughout the film. He also knows to surprise you, by breaking the tension with something unexpected. The night time crossing of the river is a stand-out scene.

The only problems in Rogue are some of the cast. Sam Worthington. Can't stand him. I'm maybe being unfair but I still haven't got over how useless Avatar is. He's actually not too bad, but he brings back shocking memories. Then there's the family where the mother has cancer. The mother and father are both irritating. I was glad when they were out of it. They don't necessarily get killed though.

The practical and CGI effects work well on the crocodile and only a few shots look ropey. Most of the time it looks believable. There are some amusing deaths too. Not as many as you'd like, but okay. All in all, a fun film that exceeded my expectations.
7/10
evlkeith
 


If you like this you could also try:
Lake Placid, Alligator, Spiders.