Posts Tagged ‘Thriller’


And that secret is it’s a bad movie: “Secret in Their Eyes”

February 25, 2016


Secret in Their Eyes wants to be a prestige Oscar-bait picture really badly. I mean, really, really badly. Like Blofeld-wants-to-kill-James-Bond bad. I mean, look at everything stuffed into it: The War on Terror, the death of a child, a mystery, cops, and about as many of Hollywood’s heavy-hitters as you’re legally allowed to have in a film before you have to register as a chapter of the Church of Scientology. This is a movie that would gladly throw anyone into a piranha tank if it meant that statuette. I’m pretty sure if was possible (and more importantly, feasible) this movie would blow every Academy member. It just wants to be taken seriously so bad….Bwhahahaha! Too bad it’s just really overcooked and ridiculous.
Read the rest of this entry ?


Because we haven’t suffered enough: “Hitman: Agent 47”

August 25, 2015


So, this is really happening, huh? We actually have a remake/reboot/further installment of the Hitman, uh, franchise (please God tell me we don’t have to call it a franchise). This despite the fact that the first Hitman movie was a critical and financial flop that no one really wanted in the first place. But, Hollywood being Hollywood, a couple of railed-to-the-gills-on-coke movie execs decided, what the hell. I mean, just because the movie failed once maybe it’ll fail less badly this time. And that’s how we got Hitman: Agent 47. At least I assume that’s what happened. It really doesn’t matter. Like chlamydia or a tornado it’s here and we have to deal with it.

Read the rest of this entry ?


Just don’t taunt the Bigfoot: “Willow Creek”

October 14, 2014


Okay, this is going to be a brief one since Willow Creek is a pretty slight movie, clocking in at a measly 77 minutes. Wait, really? 77 minutes? There are episodes of Doctor Who that run longer than that. Okay, maybe that’s not best example, but still. 77 minutes? Is it even legal to make a feature film that short? Well, whatever, nothing I can do about it. Given the fact this is a Bigfoot movie, and a found-footage Bigfoot movie at that, it’s probably merciful the movie’s this short.
Read the rest of this entry ?


He’s quiet enough…occasionally kills people: “The American”

September 13, 2010

Once more, I’m gonna warn you from the offset that this review is going to spoil The American. Like Moon, there’s really no other way talk about this film without giving away its ending. If you’ve come to this review looking for advice whether or not you should see the American, then here you go: yeah, you should see it. Just don’t go in expecting a thrill-ride or a George Clooney-led Bourne Identity knockoff. It’s slow and meditative and character-driven. It’s gorgeous to look at, too. Plus there’s a ton of chick nudity, which, you know,  always helps.
Read the rest of this entry ?


Falsely advertised, but still good: “Freaky Faron”

August 24, 2010

Okay, a quick one this time, since the movie I’m reviewing doesn’t really bear a huge amount of analysis–a slight little DIY venture called Freaky Faron. Now, the Netflix description of the movie promises a supernatural thriller about a teenage girl with a violent past fending off an alien invasion. Sounds neat, huh? Yeah, you mostly don’t get that. Still, once you shake off the disappointment of false advertising, you grow to appreciate the movie writer/director John Ross created on a shoestring budget.  He may not have made the X-Files clone the ads promised, but he did deliver a neat ‘tweener mystery. If you’ve ever wondered what a Dashiell Hammett short story would be like if the Continental Op was not a fireplug-shaped bruiser, but instead a red-haired 16 year-old girl (and, really, who hasn’t wondered that from time to time?) then this is your movie.
Read the rest of this entry ?


Admin Notes: I’m a big slacker, and a historic day!

September 15, 2009


So, first off an apology for my tardiness on continuing “Schlocktastic ’80s” week. The work-wife came out here to hunt giant monitor lizards for a week and she needed someone to act as a lure. So anyway, between trips to Lumpini Park and Bumrungrad Hospital, I got a little behind. Sorry about that. I’m working on the rest of it now.

Secondly, September 14th was a historic day here at The Flickering Screen. It was the first time any other post racked up more hits than “Let Us Pause and Appreciate Chicks Wearing Glasses.” Ever since “Glasses” was posted on 20 June 2008, it has been a juggernaut, easily outranking all other posts by about 300% And why not? Chicks in glasses are hot. The post that unseated it? My review of “Aztec Rex.”

So, basically this:



Was more popular than this:


Make of that what you will…


Quentin Tarantino wins the war: “Inglourious Basterds”

August 23, 2009

Inglourious-Basterds[I’m going to spoil some of the secrets of Inglourious Basterds here, so if you haven’t seen the movie yet and you really want to read this review, rush right out and see it. Otherwise, you know, don’t knock yourself out]

Okay, so imagine a scene in which a couple characters talk to each other. Their dialogue is crisp and memorable. Their performances range from the very good to the incredible. The discussion is fraught with tension as one party endeavors to keep a secret that the other is tenaciously trying to discover, yet it is all done beneath a thin veil of civility. Then, abruptly, the veil drops and the scene gives way to a burst of brutal, contained violence. Okay, now repeat that about a half-dozen times and you pretty much have Inglourious Basterds, the movie that may very well mark the moment when Tarantino stopped making movies and began just slapping individual, barely-connected scenes on the screen.  
Read the rest of this entry ?