b1038752
Joined Oct 2013
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges2
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews6
b1038752's rating
Currently showing an IMDb score of 3.8 which I think is about right.
Vinnie Jones plays a prominent role but is merely a failed UK footballer (soccer player) who attempted to launch a movie career and cannot act. Foolishly I did not check the full cast list before selecting this title on a Z-list UK terrestrial TV channel as his name would have saved me tuning in.
Jones is hopeless and wooden (as expected), Christian Slater is clearly hard up for a buck (a shame given his previous work) so it is left to the youthful pseudo-teen school cast to carry this poorly written and directed pap. They don't do too badly so maybe they are worth a look in their future work.
As a B-Movie fan I was able to watch it to the cheesy end but I was surprised to see that it was made in 2014, it felt like a low budget 1990/2000 flick.
Vinnie Jones plays a prominent role but is merely a failed UK footballer (soccer player) who attempted to launch a movie career and cannot act. Foolishly I did not check the full cast list before selecting this title on a Z-list UK terrestrial TV channel as his name would have saved me tuning in.
Jones is hopeless and wooden (as expected), Christian Slater is clearly hard up for a buck (a shame given his previous work) so it is left to the youthful pseudo-teen school cast to carry this poorly written and directed pap. They don't do too badly so maybe they are worth a look in their future work.
As a B-Movie fan I was able to watch it to the cheesy end but I was surprised to see that it was made in 2014, it felt like a low budget 1990/2000 flick.
Rule no 1 of fight club XXXXXXXX sorry IMDb reviews:.
If it's a 9 rated movie then it's been hyped.
With a current overall of 9.0 and an S02E01 rating of 9.2 then this is a prime example.
Setting a series in the past does not mean that the standard of acting should be set back into the cheesy quality of a 50s B movie (that said I love B movies) and re-hashing successful old plots should not be done for the sake of it.
Not clever or ironic, this is a lame and contrived performance of tired subject.
I thought Ted Danson did an excellent job of re-inventing himself in the CSI expansion but he has undone much of that credit in this performance.
Frances McDormand killed the character of Sheriff Marge Gunderson in the 1996 original and no follow-up is necessary other then to line the pockets of greedy producers. Anyone wanting and ongoing taste of excellence should just re-run the original movie once every week or two and you will have a far better feeling then watching these re-hashed series.
Current rating of the Oscar winning 1996 original is 8.2 which is about right. This falls well short of that mark.
If it's a 9 rated movie then it's been hyped.
With a current overall of 9.0 and an S02E01 rating of 9.2 then this is a prime example.
Setting a series in the past does not mean that the standard of acting should be set back into the cheesy quality of a 50s B movie (that said I love B movies) and re-hashing successful old plots should not be done for the sake of it.
Not clever or ironic, this is a lame and contrived performance of tired subject.
I thought Ted Danson did an excellent job of re-inventing himself in the CSI expansion but he has undone much of that credit in this performance.
Frances McDormand killed the character of Sheriff Marge Gunderson in the 1996 original and no follow-up is necessary other then to line the pockets of greedy producers. Anyone wanting and ongoing taste of excellence should just re-run the original movie once every week or two and you will have a far better feeling then watching these re-hashed series.
Current rating of the Oscar winning 1996 original is 8.2 which is about right. This falls well short of that mark.
Look and feel is very much that of an early years student piece.
Drag in a few locals as victims, troll city streets with the camera running for atmosphere on the cheap and there you have it.
Feels as if it was written on the fly in that back of the story centrepiece van with the writers stumbling from one scene to the other, struggling for what to do next, until someone jumps up and shouts, "Oooh, ooh, I know!".
Not clever, not edgy, not artful, just mince, dross, PISH!.
On a positive note, the few effects based scenes were well done.
Oh dear, not enough lines for submission but with this movie so lacking in substance it's difficult to find more to say.
I'll just have to repeat the, "favours must have been owed" gag, perhaps revised to suggest that it must have been something to do with a Community Service punishment order as I don't think anyone could possibly owe a favour that big.
Drag in a few locals as victims, troll city streets with the camera running for atmosphere on the cheap and there you have it.
Feels as if it was written on the fly in that back of the story centrepiece van with the writers stumbling from one scene to the other, struggling for what to do next, until someone jumps up and shouts, "Oooh, ooh, I know!".
Not clever, not edgy, not artful, just mince, dross, PISH!.
On a positive note, the few effects based scenes were well done.
Oh dear, not enough lines for submission but with this movie so lacking in substance it's difficult to find more to say.
I'll just have to repeat the, "favours must have been owed" gag, perhaps revised to suggest that it must have been something to do with a Community Service punishment order as I don't think anyone could possibly owe a favour that big.