Purgatory of a hitman

Kill List (2011)

Had this one on my shelf for quite some time before I ended up watching it. Heard some good things about it when it was playing on the festivals so decided to buy it but never got around to watch it. Then a friend of mine said I should watch it and the director Ben Wheatley's latest movie Sightseers (2012), and so I did. I really hate trying to describe the story of a movie like this which evolves from one thing to another and yet another. But as it's told in the back cover and in the trailer as well I guess you can't really avoid it and luckily there's more to this movie than just an intriguing story. The movie reminded me of The Wicker Man (1973) in quite a few ways. Obviously the last 15 minutes or so, but also the weird feeling of the movie and the tension building from the start to finish. Not to forget the surprisingly good dark comedy. Of course comparing this to one of my all time favourite horror movies is not exactly fair, but it actually holds on quite nicely by itself. The acting is also great, so there's many things right in this movie. But there are some problems, can't go into too much details to avoid spoiling it, it's the ending mostly and some of the events leading to it. I liked the idea of it, but the actions leading to it didn't seem to make much sense and especially the outcome was weirdly predictable but still didn't really seem to make any sense. I mean the movie clearly wants to leave something for the viewer to think about, but the thing is that more you give it some thought the more ridiculous it seems. Maybe this movie needs a second viewing to get the whole point of it. But wether it's unintentionally confusing or intentionally complex didn't matter that much as this movie plays with tension quite masterfully. It's after all easier to forgive the flaws of the plot if the movie works on an emotional level and this one worked quite well.
72%

There's something fishy going on in Detroit

Crimewave (1985)

A movie written by Joel and Ethan Coen, directed by Sam Raimi and starring Bruce Campbell and Brion James amongst others must be good, right? Well not exactly, but one crazy goofball comedy it surely is. Vic (Reed Birney) is a convict on his way to the electric chair, as the officers are dragging him to meet his maker he is screaming for innocence. Then we are told as a flashback a devious tale of deception and murder, in the form of an action packed slapstick comedy. Sam Raimi himself wants to disown this movie and reading about the troubles he went through while making it, I can't blame him. Having his lead actor, editor and composer replaced by the studio is not exactly a great way to make a movie. Anyway this movie is not as bad as it at start seems. The cartoon-like over acting is a bit tedious and as it's boosted with wacky sound effects it goes so much over the top I didn't know wether to laugh or cry. But as the story goes over the top as well, it turns into a quite an entertaining goofball comedy. The acting is rather bad, though mostly deliberately so. The soundtrack is quite annoying at times and the silly sound effects didn't help it at all. But the movie looks quite good and manages to set a great mood for the crazy things happening on the screen. That's the reason why this movie squeezes above the average of it's kind.
66%

Harrison Ford lost in Paris

Frantic (1988)

Funnily enough this is one of the best thrillers ever made but it's also one of the dumbest ones as well. Roman Polanski knows how to build tension and the story telling is the best part of this movie. Too bad the story is so ridiculously unbelievable that I just can't watch this one with a straight face. I need to spoil it a bit, but believe me it doesn't affect the viewing much at all as you'll still see a technically brilliant thriller and how idiotic the story is, even if you know the part which kind of makes the whole movie seem ridiculous. It's of course the whole elaborate plan of switching suitcases to smuggle something into the country but then instead of switching them back they rather kidnap the wife and of course without telling the husband about it, so he's left there to figure things out himself. I mean come on, that feels almost like an insult towards the intelligence of the viewer or then the bad guys are deliberately portrayed as idiots, which would be kind of like saying that your movie is not worth taking seriously. Either way, that's the downfall of this movie. And it's a shame as otherwise this one is a brilliant Hitchcockian thriller. Harrison Ford is great as the doctor lost in Paris while trying to find his wife and Emmanuelle Seigner is a perfect counter part for him. That with Polanski's style and great score by Ennio Morricone make this a highly enjoyable thriller. Too bad I just can't see past the stupid plot on this one, especially since the movie reminds you of it in every turn on the way.

67%

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder

Four Flies on Grey Velvet (1971)

This is the last of the “animal series” of giallos from Dario Argento, the others being The Bird with the Crystal Plumage (1970) and The Cat O' Nine Tails (1971). This time a drummer (Michael Brandon) ends up killing a man after an unfortunate encounter. Then someone who witnessed and photographed the killing starts blackmailing him and soon bodies start piling up as he tries to cover his tracks. Well the “accidental” killing at the start was extremely far fetched and the rest of the plot isn't exactly great either. But as so many times it's the mood Argento sets up which is the driving force of his movies and this was no exception. The score by Ennio Morricone wasn't bad, but really it wasn't used as well as it could have been. The visual side however was well in hand, the compositions were quite great and the camerawork by Franco Di Giacomo was pretty much perfect. Some of the scenes are extremely memorable, whether that's a good thing or not is for the viewer to decide, I sure loved them. The biggest problem of this movie is the long and unneeded explanation of the motives at the end and in this Shameless release of the extended cut it's even longer than in the American cut. It's a shame as the ending is otherwise great it just drags on way too long on the explaining part. Apart from that and the misuse of Morricone's talents, this is a great giallo.

80%

Criminal activities through assisted living

Robot & Frank (2012)

Frank (Frank Langella) is an ex-catburglar who is starting to become old and senile. One day his son (James Marsden) brings him a robot caretaker to help out with every day living. Things don't start off too well between them but soon Frank finds out he can use the robot as his accomplice performing the tasks of a burglary he's too old for. The story of this movie is one of it's strong points, it's highly intriguing while covering some rather relevant questions about aging and the treatment of elderly people. The style is a drama comedy and I found myself laughing quite often even though the jokes weren't exactly fresh, but they fit the story very well. The drama was very light hearted even though the story covers subjects that are quite thought provoking and even touching for everyone who has elderly people in their family. I wouldn't have minded a bit deeper look into the problems, but as this is a comedy after all I understand why some of the subjects are kind of passed through briefly. Frank Langella does a great job in carrying the story which is extremely important as he's pretty much in every scene of the movie. The supporting cast were also very strong, even though they don't have that many moments to shine through. This was clearly a small budget movie, so there weren't any extravagant futuristic visions in it despite it being set in the near future, but that didn't matter at all. Actually it made it more realistic. The direction was quite solid, though nothing to rave about. All in all this was a nice little movie well worth the watch even though it didn't leave me much to go with.

76%

The filmography of Quentin Tarantino

As these were not here yet and since I just watched most of them once again, I'll write my thoughts about them here briefly. Sorry about the short reviews on some of them, but really if a movie is perfect there's not much else to add to it. I'll only include the movies directed by Tarantino, even though many of his scripts directed by others are considered as his movies. Maybe one day I'll revisit those as well. You can find my review of Django Unchained here.













Reservoir Dogs (1992)

This wasn't the first Tarantino movie I ever saw, actually I didn't even know about it's existence before I saw the one below. But after that I stormed every video rental shop in the city until I found this. I remember once I finally saw it I was actually disappointed, I mean I still thought it was a good movie, but as I was expecting another Pulp Fiction, I was let down a bit. That of course has changed since then and nowadays I think this is a brilliant masterpiece. Not only is this the best "heist" movie ever made but it's also one of the best crime movies ever made. Can't really say anything about it that hasn't been said a million times, so I'll just say it's a brilliant movie and I'd rank it as Tarantino's third best film.
98%













Pulp Fiction (1994)

I still remember when I first saw this at the theaters, something I guess I'll remember for the rest of my life. I saw it at this crappy small basement theater because I was 17 at the time and the movie had an age limit of 18, but they were cool enough in that theater to not care so much. So me and my date who was a year younger got in without any problems, even though they generally were quite strict about those age limits even back then. Now that I think of it and starting to feel all nostalgic I shouldn't call the theater crappy, I actually wish there still was theaters like that today. They had character and their own feel to them, unlike these multiplexes today. Anyway the reason why I remember it so clearly is because I was totally blown away by the movie. It was something I had never seen before and didn't even think that there could be movies like this. This was one of those movies that changed me in a way. For better or worse that I don't know, but ever since I saw it I've sought out more of these 70's exploitation movies. Seeing this movie today I found some scenes not working as well as back then, like that foot massage discussion seemed to be surprisingly dragging and uninteresting. Then again I still think the second half of this movie is probably the best comedy ever made, so it balances it out more than well. Pretty much a perfect movie, Tarantino's best and one of my all time favourites.
100%













Four Rooms (1995)

For this one I'll give a proper review as this seems to be the one most people haven't seen from Tarantino's filmography. Then again this is only one fourth of a Tarantino movie, but still I think it belongs to this list as there's a clear segment and story of the movie which he wrote and directed. The problem with these kinds of movies is the difference between the makers, which usually makes the movie rather uneven. And that certainly was the problem with this one as well. There was an attempt to glue the stories together with Ted the Bellhop (Tim Roth), but unfortunately that was one of the weakest parts of this movie. Tim Roth has never done a worse performance, so much over acting and his character is all over the place all the time. Might be partly the fault of the four different directors, but still it's a weak effort. Anyway this movie has a very bad start as the first story by Allison Anders is just plain crap and even though it's only 15 minutes or so it's still way too long to give any hope for the rest of the movie. The second story by Alexandre Rockwell worked a bit better, though as the bar was set so low by the first one it wasn't much of an effort. Again bad acting and a useless story, though not as painful to watch as the first one. The third story by Robert Rodriguez is where the movie finally gets going and there's some actually funny moments. Antonio Banderas was also very strong, pulling out the best performance of the whole movie. This third story was the strongest one in the movie, apart from the ending of the fourth. Then the fourth story by Quentin Tarantino, it's actually quite a weak story as the basic idea of it is copied from Alfred Hitchcock Presents episode. Then again that's not the real problem as the idea is what sets up the absolutely drop dead hilarious ending of the movie, it's just the 20 or so minutes leading to it. The dialogue, even though it's nicely flowing as you'd expect from Tarantino, is just plain boring most of the time. Luckily the ending saves a lot, but still it felt like Tarantino didn't really put that much of an effort for this. All in all the movie is not good, with one great episode, one good episode, one bad episode and one just shit, it's way too uneven and mostly badly acted. It's actually a shame as replacing the first two episodes with better stories and better storytellers and someone focusing on directing Tim Roth this would have been a great movie.
45%













Jackie Brown (1997)

Before this movie came out I had become a fan of the 70's exploitation flicks and Pam Grier was one of my favourite actresses, with Coffy (1973) as one of my all-time favourite movies. So expectations were high as always and this one surely delivered. This movie is a bit of an oddity in Tarantino's filmography as it's his only adapted screenplay and it's told in quite a linear format. But that actually only adds to the beauty of this movie. I haven't read the book by Elmore Leonard so can't say for sure how good the adaptation is, but as a stand alone movie this is absolutely perfect. This one probably has the best mood of all of his movies and the best soundtrack to boost it. Tarantino's second best movie.
99%













Kill Bill: Vol. 1 (2003)












Kill Bill: Vol. 2 (2004)

I'll put these two together as that's the way they were meant to be, one four hour action extravaganza. I was really blown away by these when I first saw them, but I must say these are the ones I have most seldom revisited out of Tarantino's works. That doesn't mean they wouldn't be amazing, it's just that four hours is a long running time for a movie no matter how great it is. So my only gripe with these is the length, even though watching them again I really can't think of a single scene worth leaving out. It's very hard to place brilliant movies in any order but I'd say this is Tarantino's fifth best film.
95%













Death Proof (2007)

Tarantino's take on a slasher, though this time the usual knife is replaced with a car. The cast is great as always, even though it's a Kurt Russell show. The biggest problem of this movie is that Tarantino kind of forgets that slashers need to have people dying on them, not just chatting along. Sure when the killing starts it's brilliant, but really there's too much talking and not enough action for a grindhouse movie. Tarantino's worst, but still a good movie none the less.
75%













Inglourious Basterds (2009)

The absolutely brilliant cast carries this hilarious movie with maybe Brad Pitt's best performance ever to boost it. The thing that troubles me with this one is the continuity errors, there's way too many of them and even multiple times in one scene. I don't usually complain about things like that and I've seen plenty in Tarantino's other movies as well, but for some reason I keep spotting way too many of them in this one. But that's small details as this is Tarantino's fourth best movie.
97%

Sorry about the short reviews, but really long praising posts are rather boring to read and well I kind of expect most people have already seen these movies.

Crime novel characters come to life

Hammett (1982)

Hammett (Frederic Forrest) is a writer who just finishes his latest crime story and is ready to cash in a few bucks for taking it to his publisher. But a visit from an old friend Jimmy (Peter Boyle) from his times at the law enforcement gets Hammett himself mixed up in a real life crime story just like his characters in his stories. Set in the 1920's San Francisco and boosted with a bluesy jazz soundtrack there's that breeze of film noir running through this movie. Though I would have hoped that the photography would have had a bit more film noir feel to it, now it's just a bit too straight forward and apart from a very few scenes doesn't play with the shadows at all. It's a shame as the story and the settings otherwise had film noir written all over it. Speaking of the settings, they were created very nicely and the movie looked quite great. And as the soundtrack was very good as well, I really loved the mood of this movie. Frederic Forrest carries the movie with his great performance but the rest of the cast isn't bad at all either. Peter Boyle, Lydia Lei and Marilu Henner just to mention a few were great as well. The biggest problem of this movie, in addition to the fact that the photography kind of misses the film noir aspect of it all, was the story. It's unnecessarily complex so it takes a long time before the viewer can even understand what's going on. That makes the first half of the movie seem quite dull, luckily in the end the story comes together nicely. But it surely could have been a bit simplified as after all this is a movie that relies on the feeling more than the story so a less complicated story would have worked just as well or in this case even better. Despite it's flaws I was thoroughly entertained and even though it's not a brilliant movie it's still well worth watching.

78%

Can't find a trailer for this movie anywhere online.

When one psychopath just isn't enough

Seven Psychopaths (2012)

Martin McDonagh is probably the most interesting new director at the moment. I've been waiting to see a new movie from him ever since I saw In Bruges (2008) and indeed it's been a long wait. But luckily it was worth it. Marty, Colin Farrell, is a screenwriter with a writers block, so he seeks help from whiskey bottles. Billy, Sam Rockwell, Marty's friend, is an unemployed actor who runs a dog kidnapping business with an elderly gentleman Hans, Christopher Walken. Billy, who is determined to help Marty find a great idea for a script, ends up dognapping the wrong Shih Tzu. The dog belongs to Charlie, Woody Harrelson, a ruthless mob boss who is willing to kill everyone in town if it brings back his dog. As that wouldn't have made things bad enough for Billy and Marty who gets mixed up in the dognapping, the script they are planning requires psychopaths, so Billy decides to advertise on the local paper that they are looking for psychopaths to interview for the script. So there's some weird people destined to knock on the door when things are already going crazy. There's so much going on in this movie that it's exhausting, mostly it's actually a good thing, but at times it kind of loses focus. Still there's that great mood which was in his previous movie as well and the comedy is extremely dark so I didn't care that much, was mostly just laughing my ass off. But it's not just a crazy violent comedy, there's quite a many witty ideas in it as well. The cast is absolutely brilliant, with surprisingly Sam Rockwell stealing the show from the others. And the mood, it's every bit as great as it was in In Bruges, just for that this movie should have been on my best of 2012 list, but unfortunately saw it only now. The scope of the movie is so large that it does tend to crack from the edges, but none the less it's a great movie.

89%

When the rich and the poor clash

Dead End (1937)

This is a very nice little film noir, even though film noir puritists might argue about it being a film noir in the first place. Well it's a drama involving criminal activities with cynical attitudes and quite a few noirish shots, so that's enough for me. Anyway the movie is set on the docks of East River in New York where the rich and the poor neighborhood divide sharing one block in between. That of course builds tensions between the two “classes” and sure enough things end up getting violent. The main couple of the movie is actually overshadowed by the supporting characters so much that their ordeals end up being just another story on the block. It's Humphrey Bogart's Baby Face Martin and the Dead End Kids who run the show in this movie. Not only are those characters more interesting, they are also played brilliantly. The themes in this one are just as valid today as they were back in the 30's, you could actually say they are even more relevant today as the rich keep getting richer and the poor are still poor. William Wyler does a great job at keeping the pace fast moving and the dialog sounds real enough to fool me. The cinematography is at points very straight forward, almost documentary like, which fits the story brilliantly, but then again there are some absolutely stunning noir like shots in there as well. Watching this now shows clearly that it's shot in the studio and the matte paintings were rather visible, especially as the DVD had a very nice image quality, that eats the realism a bit, but in the end it didn't matter much. There were some unintentionally funny moments, like when a guy gets killed the news about it is already in the papers around the block few minutes later and so on, but those are also partly the charm of old movies. Kind of like winking at the viewer not to over think it, it fits the story so just go with the ride. In the end this was a very good movie that has stood time amazingly well.

87%

Why don't we have sex before I kill you?

She Killed in Ecstasy (1971)

This is one of the better movies from the infamous exploitation guru Jess Franco, that however doesn't make this a great movie. Dr. Johnson's experiments with aborted fetuses is brought to a stop by a group of surprisingly jealous colleagues who deem it inhumane and revoke his license. Not only that but they decide to trash his laboratory as well for some weird reason. Unable to do what he loves the most makes dr. Johnson lose his mind and commit suicide. Dr. Johnson's wife swears revenge on the people who destroyed her husband, so she decides to seduce and kill all of them. Well needless to say the plot is quite crap and the acting is mostly weak, but that's not exactly the point of this movie. It's of course the sex and violence which both there are plenty enough, though getting there takes surprisingly long. The violence is quite mild compared to others of it's kind and the effects are rather bad. The sex on the other hand is well in hand, mostly thanks to Soledad Miranda who is always a pleasure for the eyes. She also is the one who puts the most effort into the acting and does a surprisingly good performance turning from an innocent wife into a crazed seductive killer. The cinematography and the set design are quite brilliant so the movie looks gorgeous. The music is also great, even though it does start to repeat itself a bit too much in the end. So in the end there's quite a bit I liked in this movie, but on the other hand there was an equal amount which I didn't.

50%

Walk down the right back alley in Sin City and you can find anything

Sin City (2005)

When I first saw this I loved it to death, but as time has passed and I hadn't seen it in about 4 years, I decided to watch it again. Well I still loved the ultra-noir style of it, even though this time I noticed a couple of shots that didn't really fit the mood that well. I love the comics and I must say this is the best adaptation possible. The visual style is pretty much exactly what you'd expect from a live action movie adaptation of the book. Can't say the same about the music, then again as comic books don't have soundtracks, it's all in what you personally prefer. I always imagined a jazzy soundtrack to it, but the one it has wasn't that bad either. The cast is stellar and mostly fit the characters brilliantly. Though I thought that Clive Owen didn't really match Dwight from the comic, he was a bit too emotional for the role, but luckily he is a good actor so it wasn't that big of a deal as he manages to pull off a good performance. The stories aren't the best of the comics, but they mix together nicely so I can understand why they chose these. Marv's story steals the show as he is by far the most entertaining character of the comics and Mickey Rourke does a brilliant job at the role. In fact that story steals the show so much it makes the other stories seem a lot weaker than they really are. And that kind of makes the movie uneven at times. But then again as the pace is fast non stop thrill ride you won't get bored for a second. It didn't work as well this time as it did before but still it's one of the best comic book adaptations and a brilliant movie in itself.
90%

One for the jazz fans

The Cotton Club (1984)

In the 20's the Cotton Club was the coolest place in town where all the celebrities and street kingpins spent their quality time. The performers were the best of the best from jazz musicians to dancers and singers. Even though close to all of the performers were black the club was for white folk only, which of course added it's own tension in addition to the mafia bosses fighting for the biggest share of Harlem. Dixie Dwyer (Richard Gere) is a skilled musician who ends up being a favourite to a nasty mob boss who takes him under his wing, even though Dixie doesn't really like the idea. Dixie's brother, Vincent (Nicolas Cage), is a small time crook looking to get a footing in the city. Vera Cicero (Diane Lane) is an up and coming singer also looking for a big breakthrough. Sandman Williams (Gregory Hines) is a tap dancer with his brother who get a spot in the Cotton Club's show. Owney Madden (Bob Hoskins) is the guy who runs the place and one of the rivaling "families". They all eventually end up mixed together and things of course don't always go as planned. There's so much going on in this movie that once you try to write what's it about it might seem quite confusing, but Coppola keeps it all well in hand. Even though the movie would have worked just as well with a bit less characters to focus on, none of them still seem unimportant. That's of course thanks to the script and good direction. The cast is quite big and quite varying, there's some brilliant performances and some pretty bad ones as well. Though in the end they kind of balance out. If you're a jazz fan, you'll love this movie as there's plenty of music in it and some quite nice performances. I wonder why the movie flopped so bad when it came out as this is definitely not a bad one, it's big, pretty and entertaining, just what the audience wants. Though it's a bit long and tends to get a bit boring at parts, but luckily there's always a nice comeback to get the attention again. Not the best from Coppola, but still a good and entertaining movie.
73%

The bomb wars

Kill the Irishman (2011)

Danny Greene (Ray Stevenson) is an Irish thug who gets fed up with his crappy job. He decides to take over the union and of course all the dirty business that comes with it. He starts to work with the mafia, but after some money goes missing they end up in a war. He's also an informant for the police and in the brink of getting a divorce. So life is not easy, but Danny is a tough guy and no matter what the mafia tries they just can't kill him. There's a lot of stuff crammed into this one movie and some aspects are left quite superficial as it focuses on blowing things up. And I really mean blowing things up, there's a ridiculous amount of explosions in this movie, more than in your average war movie. The biggest problem with this movie is that it's your basic mafia movie but just replace the Italian mafioso with an Irish one and all the shooting and piano wires with explosives. The thing is that when you watch this movie you know exactly what's going to happen. The small time thugs get big and then they start dying. Making the main character an Irishman, even though he has actually never even been to Ireland, just doesn't bring enough new angle to the old story. Sure the whole bombing wars thing was a fun aspect, but still that didn't help the predictable outcome one bit. So in the end it's just another mafia movie, well made for sure, but leaves absolutely nothing to go home with.
50%

When giallo met poliziesco

What Have They Done to Your Daughters? (1974)

Another mix of giallo and poliziesco (Italian crime movie). This time it's more in the poliziesco side, even though it has most of the giallo elements also. The police find a teenage girl who has apparently hung herself, but soon it turns out that there's a lot more to it than just a suicide. The detectives stumble onto a child prostitute business that seems to have it's claws all the way up to the highest officials of the city. This is one of the better crossovers of it's kind, though die hard giallo fans might be a bit disappointed as it's more on the crime movie side of things. But there are a couple of stylish suspense scenes that even come close to being horror at parts. That doesn't mean that the rest of the movie wouldn't be stylish, on the contrary, it's a very stylish thriller all the way. The cinematography is at parts pure brilliance and despite the movie being a bit "stiff" at times, it has a great mood to it. The soundtrack by Stelvio Cipriani is one of the best I've heard. The main theme in it self sounds quite silly and light hearted, but once you combine it with the theme of the movie it'll start to haunt you. That's absolutely brilliant. The dubbing of course made the acting seem a bit bad at times, but still I quite liked the casting. It's not a perfect movie by any means, but still it's one of the best crossovers and a very good movie in itself.
81%

To live and die in London

London Boulevard (2010)

Mitchel (Colin Farrell) has just got out of jail and is looking to leave all the criminal things behind. But as it turns out it's not as easy as it sounds, especially as the local crime lord, Gant (Ray Winstone), has set his eyes on Mitchel. Mitchel takes a job from a famous movie star, Charlotte (Keira Knightley), who is being stalked by paparazzis. The two sides of course don't really fit and it starts to look like there will be a clash of powers at some point. The story was quite common offering very little new and that's part of the main problem with this movie. The movie doesn't say anything, things just happen and there's not really much point to it. You are constantly given two choices how the movie will end and it doesn't even try to surprise you. So I have to wonder what's the point of it all? We've already seen these kind of stories so why make another if you have nothing new to give to it. Sure the movie didn't get boring at any point, mostly thanks to the great cast and some good dialog, but in the end it's just light entertainment that leaves you nothing to go home with. Except maybe the question of where have I seen this all before?
40%

My dear, is that a power tool in your pocket or are you just excited to see me?

My Dear Killer (1972)

This is another crossover from a poliziesco (Italian crime movie) to a giallo. It's a murder mystery and we follow the investigation from an inspector's (George Hilton) point of view. What starts out as an accident investigation turns into a murder spree and the only clue is a child's drawing. I quite liked the story, I mean it's very basic, but it reminded me of those detective stories from the 50's of course this time spiced up with the giallo style brutal murders. The viewer is given all the leads as the inspector discovers them so it's quite fun to try and guess what has happened, though you don't need to scratch your head too hard for it. The cast is fairly ok, none of them made an impression but they weren't bad either. The style is not the most artistic, but there are some scenes that looked quite great and Ennio Morricone's music spiced them up nicely. This movie is far from the best from either of the genres but still it has it's moments and was worth checking out.
67%

Sometimes amnesia is better than bad memories

Puzzle (1974)

This lesser known movie is a strange mix of giallo and italian crime movie. It's a story about a man who has lost his memory as a result of a car accident. He finds out he has a wife who is being stalked by someone who breaks into her house, drugs her and turns the whole place upside down. As fragments of memories start to return to the man, we slowly start to see the bigger picture which looks quite grim. I really love the story in this one and how it's told. Surprising for a giallo that this actually has a good script and the thriller is very gripping. It's told in a slow manner where the viewer gets just what the main character can remember. This builds the movie into a very intriguing mix of crime thriller drama and even horror at parts. It's not as stylish as most of the giallos and actually this script in the hands of some of the masters like Argento, Bava or Martino would have been one of the best giallos ever made. Now it's definitely not bad either, but still as it's missing a bit of the style it didn't work as well as it really could have. Still it's a good movie and well worth watching, even if you wouldn't be that much into giallos.
73%

Crime is brutal, in this case maybe a bit too much

Contraband (1980)

Lucio Fulci, the godfather of gore goes for a poliziotteschi, Italian crime movie, that surely sounds interesting if nothing else. The thing is that Fulci is categorized as just a gorehound and his artistic talent doesn't really get any recognition even though he has done some quite a brilliant movies in middle of all the blood and guts. Too bad this wasn't one of them and surely didn't help that categorization. I mean the movie had tons of potential and some brilliant scenes but in the end it focuses too much on the gruesome shock effects and neglects the good ideas the plot had to offer. It's a story about a smuggler called Luca whose brother is killed by a rival drug gang and as he goes for revenge he stumbles on to a mafia war that doesn't shy on bodycount. Despite the slow and quite promising start the movie soon takes a turn to focus brutal violence and forgets the context in middle of the mess. As typical for Fulci, the women get the worst share of the violence in a few scenes where even the most hardened gorehound will have hard time watching. The cast is fairly good with Fabio Testi as the most notable of course. The dubbing is probably the worst I've heard in an Italian movie, so watch the movie in it's original language with subtitles or it'll just seem unintentionally funny. I was quite disappointed in the music, Fabio Frizzi is one of the greatest composers from Italy, right after Ennio Morricone, so I was expecting a lot more from it than this. So the movie had potential, but unfortunately it's not used that well. Gorehounds will get their fair share of blood and guts, the rest get just an average eurocrime movie with too much focus on the violence.
56%

Uwe Boll with a good idea, and it's not even April fools

Rampage (2009)

Uwe Boll, the man who has made crap into his own artform, usually makes only two kinds of movies, horribly bad ones or very rarely those which turn out to be so bad that they are hilarious. This one however was neither. It's horribly shot, it's rather badly acted, it's completely morally wrong, it's direction seems a bit lost at times, it's full of plot holes and idiotic actions, yet it's not a bad movie. The premise of the movie actually promised quite a bit more than the movie finally delivered, but the way it takes is not a bad one either. At least I didn't see that big twist coming until a few scenes before it actually happens. Now for sure it waters down the striking and thought provoking start of the "rampage" but it turns the movie into a whole different track which is actually good for it. It kind of saves it a bit from becoming a moral train wreck where it clearly was going. So I have to admit Uwe Boll has actually stumbled into a quite a brilliant idea here. Too bad he can't use it to it's full potential and kind of loses track with it too often. Even though at parts the movie is quite painful to watch with the bad camera work, tedious repetitive editing and not very good acting, it's still worth to sit through it. These kind of movies are quite hard to review, I mean when you have a bad movie but the ending saves it and makes the rest of the movie actually feel better. I'm going to rate it based on the feeling it left me with, just be warned that getting there might not be easy.
70%

2 rounds of 13

Can you believe it? There's another remake of an European fairly good movie. What a surprise...



13 Tzameti (2005)

This was a positive surprise when I saw it. It's a story about a young man who decides to take a dead man's identity in hopes of scoring some money. He ends up in a deadly game played by powerful wealthy men where they gamble on the lives of the contestants. It's done with a low budget, shot in black and white, but it only adds to the gritty realism of it. Sure the acting could have been better at parts and a bit bigger budget for the settings wouldn't have hurt but it works well enough as it is.
75%



13 (2010)

So the Americanized version is luckily directed by the same man who did the original. And the cast surely looks better with Jason Statham, Mickey Rourke and the likes in it. But sadly the cast didn't really help, this movie has horrible acting. And I really think the director is to be blamed from this as I know many of the actors can do a whole lot better than this. The settings are a bit better and there is clearly a bigger budget behind it, so there is some improvement. But really the acting put me off so badly that this really is worse than the original.
40%