Cynical Evaluations of Cinema: Movie Reviews

[Reply #320 on:]

It's still Heston's biggest moment of overacting in the whole film, though...YOU MANIACS! YOU BLEW IT UP! DAMN YOU! DAMN YOU ALL TO HEEELLLLL!!!!!

A

He tops that twice in Beneath the Planet of the Apes.

[Reply #321 on:]

Do you mean Heston (who is in parts of the film) or Franciscus (who is the main star of Beneath)?

[Reply #322 on:]

Heston.

The first two films are fantastisch.

[Reply #323 on:]

Indeedely, and yes, I mean Heston.

[Reply #324 on:]

Battle for the Planet of the Apes

I've seen this before, but it was on TV, and I jumped at it. I love the classic Planet of the Apes films. They just have a certain vibe to them. Yes, I know they are people in ape suits, but they seem more believable than CGI. CAESAR!

A


The Princess and the Frog

I have been wanting to see this ever since it came out, and I rented it on-demand yesterday.

In short, it was amazing. Disney finally returned to classic animation. It had a great story-line that I didn't find cheesy. Disney definitely made an instant classic. I absolutely loved that it was set in New Orleans instead of some time 300 years ago. I was thrilled that Randy Newman was the composer for this film. I have never disliked any of his songs, and he definitely didn't come short of expectations. Good catchy songs, especially "Down in New Orleans" and "Almost There."

I especially liked the darker elements to the movie...it's Disney, yet a little more mature. The shadow and voodoo parts were honestly a little bit creepy to me. If my 5-year-old cousin had seen this, we would have had to fast forward. Not only that but

Show spoiler

When Ray died, I half expected him to come back alive by some magic...that's Disney. But no, he appears as a star. I really liked that.

There's so much more I could say, but I don't want to ramble.

Officially my favorite Disney movie.

A+

[Reply #325 on:]

Beneath the Planet of the Apes

Show spoiler

EVERYBODY DIES!!!!!!!!

I can imagine audiences seeing this when it originally came out, with huge expectations, being somewhat disappointed. Telepathic mutant superhumans? The series went from cheesy to CHEESERIFIC. Unlike the first film, my memory of this film was far more fond than was deserved. This one doesn't hold up quite as well as the first, in my opinion. At the time it came out, some of the sci-fi concepts were probably very new and daring and interesting, but now it sort of plays out like a ridiculous soap opera.

Still, this film is fun to watch. James Franciscus turns in a great performance, and Heston is back for another go. But it feels rushed, and some parts don't make any sense. It bothers me that you never get really any backstory on the mutants and how they've survived there. Also, why the fuck don't they defend themselves when the apes come charging in and attack??? Instead they just run away as the apes shoot and capture them. They just forced a man to his knees in crippling pain, and made two men fight to the death against their will, with just their minds...but now they just choose to do nothing when the apes attack?

The ending is both good and bad. I love that Taylor's last action as he dies is to hit the trigger for the bomb, essentially wiping out the planet and ridding the universe of both ape and man, who were both war-mongering hypocrites crusading in the name of peace. How many movies end with Earth being completely wiped out? But morally it doesn't really say anything more than the first film did...it just repeats the same concepts. Instead of a great speech like this one from the first film (which is repeated at the beginning of Beneath), we get just this (ignore the "damn you all to hell"). I think the first one would have been a lot more poignant and meaningful as an ending quote than what we got...a declaration that, yes indeed, him pressing the trigger means Earth was destroyed. Thanks for the confirmation! The delivery of the line feels effortless and flat, the audio cuts out suddenly (just like in that video), the credits roll...it just feels very awkward and anticlimactic to me.

Still a good film, but nowhere near as good as the first.

B-

[Reply #326 on:]

   The Princess and the Frog

Princess, put the monkey down!

[Reply #327 on:]

The Planet of the Apes sequels are dire. I adore the first film, and I can appreciate a lot of the ideas in Beneath, but that's just it. Battle for is depressingly bad.

[Reply #328 on:]

A film I don't get why everyone hates: The Happening. It wasn't that bad.

[Reply #329 on:]

But nothing is happening!

[Reply #330 on:]

I like to imagine the wind is some really ugly, fat guy's fart gas, or the stench of Zoidberg.

[Reply #331 on:]

Never heard of it...

[Reply #332 on:]

Check it out Otis, it's kind of corny but I like it.

[Reply #333 on:]

I liked that film because of Zooey Deschanel. Check out the other: Yes Man. She's pretty darn good in therein movie (Thanks for reminding me it, Danny).

[Reply #334 on:]

Yeah I just watched Yes Man again last week, went watching it at the Cinema with my Mum and my Bro when it came out, so awkward at the blowjob scene.

[Reply #335 on:]

Escape from the Planet of the Apes

I am...surprised. This actually turned out to be way better than I remembered. So many people (including in this thread) say only the first and second are any good, but I completely disagree...this is a good film. In fact, in my opinion, it's a great film.

The thing about this film is you have to understand that it's not trying to be the same type of film as the first two. If you go in expecting the sort of bleak, dark world the first two films created, of course you're going to be disappointed. You can tell right from the music (which is completely awesome) at the beginning that this is a different sort of movie. And for what the film is, it's well-written, wonderfully acted, and genuinely fun, amusing, and touching throughout.

The premise for this film is that Cornelius and Zira (the two good apes from the first two films who help Taylor and Brent) salvage Taylor's ship with the help of their friend Dr. Milo and use it to abandon Earth just before it's destroyed at the end of Beneath. The energy resulting from the destruction of Earth somehow creates a rift in time, sending the ship back in time to the 70s. The three apes suddenly find themselves in human society...so essentially, it's a total reversal of the first two films.

Normally you'd think reversing the concept wouldn't work, and would seem unnecessary and annoying, but amazingly the writers seem to hit all the right notes. The humans' reactions to the apes being able to talk (and being incredibly charming at that) is handled in an excellent and surprisingly believable fashion. The entire first half of the film is tons of fun and actually has a really good sense of humor, as the humans fall in love with the apes and they become a sensation. There are some scenes that are a bit too corny, like the scene where Cornelius and Zira try on new outfits, but these scenes aren't too excessive and are still tolerable.

Of course, when Cornelius and Zira accidentally let it slip that apes eventually dominate humans in the future, and that the Earth is ultimately destroyed in war, some of the higher up humans decide that they must prevent the birth of Zira's unborn child in an attempt to change the future. It definitely doesn't help that in an act of frustration, Cornelius accidentally hits an innocent orderly too hard, killing him. This leads to a line in the film that rubs me the wrong way, Cornelius' line "I'm not responsible for the orderly's death, I swear!". It may have been an accident, but that's still manslaughter, and yes you are still responsible for his death...but whatever.

My biggest bone to pick with this film, though, is when Cornelius explains to the humans, while being interrogated, how the apes eventually rise up against them. He explains how a plague wipes out dogs and cats, and humans decide to replace them by keeping primates as pets. The primates' long-term exposure to human behavior eventually makes them smarter, and they are soon being used to perform services for humans. As they get even smarter, they start to realize they are being used as slaves, and finally one ape says "no" and starts a revolution. My problem is not with the explanation itself...it's a great story, and it becomes the entire basis for the next film Conquest. My problem is that Cornelius knowing this makes absolutely NO sense in the context of the previous two films. He says that this story is written in the apes' ancient scrolls, implying that all apes know about it, which makes even less sense. In the first film, when they meet Taylor who speaks, they are flabbergasted. None of the apes had any knowledge whatsoever of humans ever being intelligent (except for possibly Dr. Zaius, who was keeping it a secret). It simply makes no sense that Cornelius is suddenly familiar with this story.

But you know what, I'll forgive that simply because it IS a good explanation otherwise, and because the rest of the film is so enjoyable. The ending is fairly brutal, Cornelius and Zira are both shot to death, and you see what you think at the time is Zira's baby shot a gratuitous number of times. At the end of the film you discover they switched their baby with another baby chimp in the circus to protect it, which is a good twist...although it doesn't make the record skip footage of the baby saying "Mama" at the end any less creepy. Still...

B+

[Reply #336 on:]

In the first film, when they meet Taylor who speaks, they are flabbergasted. None of the apes had any knowledge whatsoever of humans ever being intelligent (except for possibly Dr. Zaius, who was keeping it a secret). It simply makes no sense that Cornelius is suddenly familiar with this story.

Unless Zaius shared the information with them after Taylor's departure into the forbidden zone at the end of the first film. Zira did ask him what Taylor would find out there. This could have led to a larger discussion.

[Reply #337 on:]

From IMDb

Both are questioned using various means of interrogation; during this time, one of Hasslein's assistants refers to the apes as "monkeys", stirring Cornelius' anger. Hasslein defuses it, saying they simply want to know how apes rose in dominance over men. Under interrogation, Cornelius reveals that according to the historic archive books in their ape society of the future, the human race will eventually meet its downfall in the late 20th Century and be dominated by simians, which will later lead to the surface of Earth's destruction through nuclear war and anarchy.

I'm pretty sure he saw those scrolls.

[Reply #338 on:]

Of course he saw the scrolls, that's what he says he knows it from. The problem is the scrolls are the apes' religious text. If it was in the scrolls, then all apes would know about it. There's no evidence whatsoever in the first two films that this is the case.

Unless Zaius shared the information with them after Taylor's departure into the forbidden zone at the end of the first film. Zira did ask him what Taylor would find out there. This could have led to a larger discussion.

This is a possibility, but it doesn't sync up with how he explains it to the humans. Like I said, he says it's a story written in the apes' ancient scrolls, and implies that all apes are familiar with it.

[Reply #339 on:]

I don't normally bother watching movies on TV anymore since I am living in the fast-paced age of not wanting to sit through commercials. But I was bored last night, so I bring you this review:

Chocolat

Doctor Octopus is the mayor of a strictly religious town where a cute young man has recently taken over as priest, and because of his youth Doctor Octopus takes it upon himself to basically re-write every sermon he wants to give so that it mimics his own beliefs rather than allowing the priest to have his own voice even though it's a religion and therefore nobody has a voice but god!

Much to the dismay of Doc Oc, an unmarried woman and her 'bastard' child come to town and purchase an old patisserie off Dame Judi Dench, whose stuck-up daughter Trinity won't allow her to see her grandson. Throughout the film the new woman in town, Vianne, manages to convince the grandson to come to her now chocolate shop and meet his grandmother.

At some point Captain Jack Sparrow the Gypsy arrives, and eventually convinces Vianna, who is already talked about behind her back by all the stuck-up religious folk, to have super fun happy time on his tiny boat, while the husband of the town's 'crazy' woman decides to set alight the larger gypsy boats because he's an idiot. The gypsies then leave because they were starting to feel like they were unwelcome for some reason even though none of them ever did anything to anybody in the town.

In the end Trinity takes the stick out of her arse because her mother is dead and she realises that it wasn't really the new woman's fault, even though Dench had diabetes and chocolated herself to death. She and other townfolk are convinced by the 'crazy' lady to help make the chocolates for the shop, since Vianne was about to take her daughter away with her to go find somewhere else to live because she thought everyone hated her. Then it is explained that Trinity and Doctor Octopus are totally going to get it on in at least 6 months time, which you knew right from the beginning of the movie that they were going to get together at some point. Doctor Octopus now accepts Vianne because when he'd told the husband of the crazy woman that something needed to be done about the gypsies, he hadn't meant you should potentially kill some of them by setting their belongings on fire, and then he had a big revelation night of gorging on chocolate in Vianne's shop window. He looked like a fat little kid who tells his mummy 'no I didn't eat all the chocolates' even though it is smeared all over his face. This is what happens when you attempt Lent.

Oh, and Captain Jack also saves the day by coming back months after leaving. Because that's what heroes do.

Overall, this film completely derides religion, or at least, old-timey religion, by showing how close-minded religious people can be and how they miss out on eating chocolate and having sex because they're idiots. So I liked it. The End.

[Reply #340 on:]

Paul

Story was great, humor was crappy. The being was too slow and used to same three jokes to death. 3 boobs aren't funny anymore.

[Reply #341 on:]

@Josh: Review needs more KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN

[Reply #342 on:]

Montalbán is awesome in Escape, and Conquest as well.

I was gonna mention him, but forgot.

[Reply #343 on:]

Giù la testa (A Fistful of Dynamite, aka Once Upon a Time… the Revolution, aka Duck, You Sucker!)
Rod Steiger, a Mexican bandito and his band of bandito offspring run into ex-IRA explosives fugitive James Coburn... expect crappy accents from the very start!
Anyhoo Steiger persuades Coburn, his Oirish accent and his dynamite expertise to rob the Mesa Verde bank of it's gold, but then they get mixed up in the Mexican revolution and all kinds of adventures happen.
Not my favourite Sergio Leone film by far, some scenes drag on and the odd slowmo flashbacks to Dublin during the Irish revolution with tanned people everywhere really breaks the fantasy, Steiger is great in it though, and the 'splosions are impressive.
C

Hunter Prey
A throwback sci-fi chase movie from Sandy Collara (the guy who made that Batman: Dead End short).
When their ship crashes, 3 alien soldiers must track and recapture the prisoner they were transporting, but he's cunning and kills two of them leaving the third to figure out the prisoners plans...
They found a nice location (some rocky desert hills in Mexico) for filming and it was shot on a RED camera too, so it looks bright and crisp.
Really good for a budget of only $425,000.
B+

[Reply #344 on:]

I'm going to start posting in this thread more often, starting with this:


Resident Evil: Afterlife

A steaming turd so big and so stinky that it towers above all of the other steaming turds that Hollywood produces. This is a turd so big and horrible, you could smell it from space (even though space is a vacuum, that's how shitty this movie is).

I am not a fan of the 'Resident Evil' films, I'll say that off the bat. They're horrendously made, peurile pieces of crap that literally anger me to watch. This may just be the worst of the 4, although I'd have to re-watch the 2nd one to be sure, and I can assure you that I'd sooner kill myself and 50 innocent children than sit through that incredible achievement in sucking again. Seriously. This film is an anti-orgasm. That's how it makes you feel.

From its horrendously sloppy special effects to it's abysmal characters and equally abysmal acting to its writing that is so bad, I think it gave me cancer. It feels like it was written by a 12 year old who just saw 'Kill Bill' after having previously only been allowed to watch family friendly films that his parents had approved for viewing. And a stupid 12 year old at that. Possibly a mildly retarded 12 year old. Or a fully retarded 12 year old who took 10 years to write the thing because he kept losing pens up his nose and having to wait to be taken to the shops to buy more by his mother.

At one point, the film throws in an 'end of level boss' zombie for the hell of it. This zombie is twice the size of a normal human being, has a sack nailed to its head and carries a gigantic axe/hammer. There's absolutely no explanation even hinted at for its existence. This isn't like a zombie wearing a tutu or clown makeup where we can make up stories in our head. This is literally a giant zombie with a giant axe/hammer. Even if it mutated or something despite none of the other zombies doing so, where the fuck did it get that especially made giant axe/hammer? We're just supposed to accept it 'cuz. The same way we're supposed to accept that multiple shots to its head do nothing until they're fired whilst the gunman slides inbetween its legs in cool slow motion. Or that shots to zombies shoulders seem to be able to kill them now, despite the fact that it was headshots only in the first 3 films. Or that the zombies can run now despite the fact that they could only walk in the first 3 films except for the few that were specifically trained to run in a research lab in the third film.

I could write a full-length essay on everything wrong with this film, but frankly, it doesn't deserve the attention.
The film stands as an example of everything wrong with the world of film, everything wrong with Hollywood, and frankly, a great deal of everything wrong with Western culture. Fuck this film, fuck the franchise and fuck Paul W.S. Anderson.

0/10

[Reply #345 on:]

Just saw the Planet of the Apes reboot with James Franco and I was really blown away by how good it is. I came into it not expecting much, but what I got was an engaging story, fantastic character development (mostly from the monkeys though), and plenty of "OMGWTFBBQ!!!1@" moments. Really, really good.

9/10

[Reply #346 on:]

Is there a justified reason that one ape/gorilla jumps off the bridge at the helicopter that was in the trailer?
Cos that just seemed silly to me.

[Reply #347 on:]

I think you're confusing "silly" with "excessively awesome".

Almost done with Conquest, then just Battle is left. I'll probably go see Rise tomorrow night, I have some free passes to the theater here so I'll probably go with one or more of my housemates.

[Reply #348 on:]

Yes Faze that happens in the movie. I personally didn't think it was that great. I liked it enough, but it was a one time experience for me. While I can appreciate the CGI here, not using real animals at all, that's great, I do like the silliness of having people in costumes. But again this is a prequel so they wouldn't be talking and acting all civilized yet...or do they?

John Lithgow is the best part of the movie. Also the girl from Slumdog Millionaire turned out to be a beautiful woman! I'd go lesbian for her.

[Reply #349 on:]

Is there a justified reason that one ape/gorilla jumps off the bridge at the helicopter that was in the trailer?
Cos that just seemed silly to me.

Yeah, basically one of the guys in the helicopter is the bad guy who authorized the genetic testing.

[Reply #350 on:]

This is a possibility, but it doesn't sync up with how he explains it to the humans. Like I said, he says it's a story written in the apes' ancient scrolls, and implies that all apes are familiar with it.

It's been a long time since I watched them, but did we ever get any idea of how much time passed between the first film and Beneath? Because certain revelations could have occurred after the discovery of a talking human and the

Show spoiler

total destruction of the planet.

I mean, Taylor's existence would have raised questions which might have led to the revealing of "ancient scrolls". I'm just making guesses to patch up continuity errors - I'm an X-files fan, so I'm quite well-practised at it.

I am not a fan of the 'Resident Evil' films, I'll say that off the bat. They're horrendously made, peurile pieces of crap that literally anger me to watch.

The first one was okay. That's all, just okay. I didn't mind it.

Is there a justified reason that one ape/gorilla jumps off the bridge at the helicopter that was in the trailer?
Cos that just seemed silly to me.

Yes. He was protecting his beloved leader. It was actually quite a touching moment of selflessness on the part of the big fella. See the movie - it's fantastic.

[Reply #351 on:]

I remember getting into a row with a friend of mine for falling asleep early on when a bunch of us were watching Resident Evil (1). They argued how just because the first twenty minutes of the movie were bad didn't make the rest of the movie bad. And I remarked that that was the most retarded logic I'd ever heard. If a film is bad in the beginning, it's bad throughout. It might have it's good moments, but usually I can tell within the first 20 minutes where I'll like the movie or not. That's enough time to establish characters, setting, and the beginning of the plot/conflict. If 20 minutes pass and I'm still interested and wanting to see where this goes, then I'd probably consider it a good movie. Of course I'm talking about personal first impression, not quality -as in Jurassic Park 3 is so bad its good-. So yeah...Resident Evil sucks from what I saw. Also don't sit me down in a recliner and expect me not to fall asleep.

[Reply #352 on:]

This is a possibility, but it doesn't sync up with how he explains it to the humans. Like I said, he says it's a story written in the apes' ancient scrolls, and implies that all apes are familiar with it.

It's been a long time since I watched them, but did we ever get any idea of how much time passed between the first film and Beneath? Because certain revelations could have occurred after the discovery of a talking human and the

Show spoiler

total destruction of the planet.

I mean, Taylor's existence would have raised questions which might have led to the revealing of "ancient scrolls". I'm just making guesses to patch up continuity errors - I'm an X-files fan, so I'm quite well-practised at it.

Ya, I thought about that two, but it actually seems like almost NO time passed between the first film and Beneath...they actually seem to come right after one another. At the most it seems like a space of a few days. At the beginning of Beneath you see Taylor traveling after leaving the apes and finding the Statue of Liberty, when he gets captured by the mutant humans. When Brent gets to the mutant humans' lair and finds Taylors locked up, Brent has learned more about the mutant humans than Taylor has. Taylor knows almost nothing about them, which seems to imply he hasn't been there long. He also doesn't look particularly disheveled.

Still, of all the theories the one you just brought up makes the most sense. Dr. Zaius definitely seemed to know about the human society that came before them. Maybe he had the scrolls kept secret, but at the end of the first film divulged them to Cornelius.

[Reply #353 on:]

I'm going to start posting in this thread more often, starting with this:


Resident Evil: Afterlife

A steaming turd so big and so stinky that it towers above all of the other steaming turds that Hollywood produces. This is a turd so big and horrible, you could smell it from space (even though space is a vacuum, that's how shitty this movie is).

I am not a fan of the 'Resident Evil' films, I'll say that off the bat. They're horrendously made, peurile pieces of crap that literally anger me to watch. This may just be the worst of the 4, although I'd have to re-watch the 2nd one to be sure, and I can assure you that I'd sooner kill myself and 50 innocent children than sit through that incredible achievement in sucking again. Seriously. This film is an anti-orgasm. That's how it makes you feel.

From its horrendously sloppy special effects to it's abysmal characters and equally abysmal acting to its writing that is so bad, I think it gave me cancer. It feels like it was written by a 12 year old who just saw 'Kill Bill' after having previously only been allowed to watch family friendly films that his parents had approved for viewing. And a stupid 12 year old at that. Possibly a mildly retarded 12 year old. Or a fully retarded 12 year old who took 10 years to write the thing because he kept losing pens up his nose and having to wait to be taken to the shops to buy more by his mother.

At one point, the film throws in an 'end of level boss' zombie for the hell of it. This zombie is twice the size of a normal human being, has a sack nailed to its head and carries a gigantic axe/hammer. There's absolutely no explanation even hinted at for its existence. This isn't like a zombie wearing a tutu or clown makeup where we can make up stories in our head. This is literally a giant zombie with a giant axe/hammer. Even if it mutated or something despite none of the other zombies doing so, where the fuck did it get that especially made giant axe/hammer? We're just supposed to accept it 'cuz. The same way we're supposed to accept that multiple shots to its head do nothing until they're fired whilst the gunman slides inbetween its legs in cool slow motion. Or that shots to zombies shoulders seem to be able to kill them now, despite the fact that it was headshots only in the first 3 films. Or that the zombies can run now despite the fact that they could only walk in the first 3 films except for the few that were specifically trained to run in a research lab in the third film.

I could write a full-length essay on everything wrong with this film, but frankly, it doesn't deserve the attention.
The film stands as an example of everything wrong with the world of film, everything wrong with Hollywood, and frankly, a great deal of everything wrong with Western culture. Fuck this film, fuck the franchise and fuck Paul W.S. Anderson.

0/10

I enjoyed it.  I've enjoyed all of the RE films actually.  However, it's not because they're good; they're just slightly enjoyable action movies against zombies. 

I'm going to guess your big zombie guy with a giant melee weapon was specially made.  We can infer from the film that Umbrella was in the area, more specifically that Wesker was in the area, and that he was attempting to kill survivors, especially if his prize was in the area (which she was).  I'll give you everything else about the poor writing and acting though and how stuff pretty much doesn't make sense.  It's also a rather poor adaptation of the videogame timeline, but as its own timeline, I find it intriguing enough to keep watching them.  I could watch them multiple times for you if you wanted as well.

6 of 10

[Reply #354 on:]

Rise of the Planet of the Apes

As a fan of the original movies, I was expecting this to be another shit remake, but with the bonus of not having Marky Mark in it.

I was very pleasantly surprised. With many of the iconic lines from the original PotA movie thrown in, and nods to the others in the series as well, it was a fitting tribute as well as a fantastic update for the franchise. I really hope they remake the others with the same team, beginning with Escape, as I do think that the original PotA doesn't need to be remade until a few years have passed and the awdful Wahlberg version has faded from memory.

Dick Solomon and Draco Malfoy give star turns, as does James Franco, but the actor who steals the show is Andy Serkis... his performance as Caeser seals his status as the best pretend monkey person ever.

The film nicely sets up PotA, with the background footage of a manned Mars launch being shown on TV just as the apes begin to make their move... but misses a trick in not using another Heston line at that point. Fans of the originals who are watching at that moment might know what I mean.

It could not have been done better, overall - though I'd have paid extra to see Roddy McDowell make an appearance.

10/10

[Reply #355 on:]

Conquest of the Planet of the Apes

(aka the film that Rise of the Planet of the Apes is a spiritual remake of)

Here we go, the first very subpar of the original films. I was waiting for this...they couldn't all be good.

What's wrong with this movie isn't the story or turn of events. It has a premise that could make an excellent film (and very well may have, if Rise is as good as I hear), but it's handled so flatly. The characters don't have anywhere near as much depth as the last few films. The humans all seem like caricatures, and Caesar is the only ape that can talk.

It's boringly directed as well. The entire final act where the apes revolt should be exciting and thrilling, but because of how it's filmed it just seems to drag on. You never really get drawn into it, and the action shots are at such an angle and with not-so-great lighting that you can't see clearly what's happening.

There are some good parts, for sure. As I mentioned earlier, Ricardo Montalbán returns for the first part of the film, and he's great...in fact he might be the only interesting human character in the whole film, and he gets killed off.

The interesting thing about this film is that it was made in the 70s and set in the 90s, so it has a very futuristic tinge to it. It shows a society where apes are slaves, made to do all sorts of jobs like cleaning or being waiters. Any ape that disobeys its master is severely beaten. There's also a huge compound where they torture the apes in order to condition them to be servants, by exposing them to fire, beating them, and even electro-shock therapy. The point here is animal abuse, plain and simple, and it doesn't do a bad job of getting that moral concept across.

But my problem is that while this film clubs you over the head with it, the first film had already introduced that concept in a more subtle and clever way. By showing primitive humans who were held prisoner, experimented on, and treated like animals, it questioned how humans treated animals in the modern age. If the tables are turned, and humans are primitive and as stupid as animals, would we feel alright about treating them the same way we treat other creatures of the same intelligence?

C+

One to go...

[Reply #356 on:]

Taylor knows almost nothing about them, which seems to imply he hasn't been there long. He also doesn't look particularly disheveled.

Let's just dismiss it and say that they provided him with a high-level of hygiene without actually revealing anything about themselves and several months have actually passed.

a society where apes are slaves, made to do all sorts of jobs like cleaning or being waiters

I've been trying to convince my company to trial this idea so that all us employees could be promoted to cushy ape-handling jobs instead of having to do all the menial work ourselves. Thus far, they are unconvinced.

[Reply #357 on:]

I am not a fan of the 'Resident Evil' films, I'll say that off the bat. They're horrendously made, peurile pieces of crap that literally anger me to watch.

The first one was okay. That's all, just okay. I didn't mind it.

The first one is less abysmal than the 2nd and 4th ones, but it's far from okay.

[Reply #358 on:]

I seem to have fond memories of the underground setting.

[Reply #359 on:]

Paul W.S. Anderson: Franchise rapist