Road to Ice Age: Boiling Point - Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs Review

Took a little bit of break cause the Halloween season, but I'm back on the Road to Ice Age: Boiling Point. But before I get into the review I'd like to apologize for uploading this so late. Now I was planning on uploaded this at 9pm (or 6pm if you go by Pacific time). However I was feeling tired and decided on taking a nap thinking my alarm would wake me up. Problem is I set the time but I didn't set the actually alarm clock sound...oops. So once again, I'm sorry for uploading this so late.

Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs is an animated adventure comedy and the third film in the franchise. It was produced by 20th Century Fox Animation and Blue Sky Studios with 20th Century Fox once again being the distributor. Carlos Saldanha directed while Michael Berg, Peter Ackerman, Mike Reiss, Yoni Brenner, and Jason Carter Eaton wrote the screenplay & story.

The story is, it's been twenty-two months since the events of the second movie and Manny and Ellie are expecting a child. But this isn't the only change that's happening. Diego is thinking about leaving The Herd because he feels like he's losing his hunter instincts and with a combination of Manny & Ellie getting ready for parenthood & Diego leaving, Sid is feeling anxious he'll be abandoned. To fill this anxiety Sid adopts three supposedly abandoned eggs which turn into baby T-Rexes. Soon the T-Rex mother takes both Sid & her children to a subterranean lost world populated by dinosaurs. Now, The Herd comes together once again to rescue Sid and bring him home.

• Negatives

I've got nothing.

• Mix

The only mix bag is the story. Now the adventure through the dinosaur underground is actually pretty fun in both terms of action and humor. But where things don't feel quite right is character arcs. They've got good ideas and themes going for them. Manny being nervous about being father again after what happened to his last family, Diego having an identity crisis, and Sid feeling as though he won't have a place anymore once things start changing. It's all good stuff, but those story arcs didn't really get that much attention. A lot of the times those arcs take a backseat for the more adventurous elements. Because of that you almost forget some of these guys had story arcs to begin with. So we got was an uneven balance of character work and action.

• Positives

Now I'm gonna keep these next three praises as short as possible because a lot of it is repeats of my previous praises for the last two movies. One praise I'll give is the pacing. While the quality doesn't reach pure perfection, at least the third film continues the tradition of these movies not over staying their welcome.

Then there's the animation. We know the animators can do ice settings so it was nice to see Blue Sky challenge themselves doing a setting fit for dinosaurs and they did a great job. The dinos have get details on them and they move with lots of dynamic motions. Then there's the underground world the dinosaurs live in. It's a visual highlight. It's very tropical so you get a lot of beautiful colors, great set pieces, and a large scope.

The last thing I'll praise is the voice acting. The familiar cast consisting of Romano, Leary, Leguizamo still have good chemistry. Meanwhile Queen Latifah continues to be entertaining as Ellie and Seann William Scott and Josh Peck are also still funny as Crash and Eddie. But I gotta give it Simon Pegg as the new character for this movie, Buck aka "Buck Wild". Pegg brings out Buck's oddball eccentric personality to a great degree. Not to mention he nails a lot of Buck's quotable lines. I still to this day can't get that bit of Buck being married to an ugly pineapple out of my head. And that's primarily because of Pegg's hilarious delivery.

Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs is another good entry to the franchise despite character arcs sometimes not getting the focus they needed.

My final rating is, Good.

That's all for now. Come back on Thursday, Nov 5th, for my A Look Back at review of the 2003 movie, The Cat in the Hat. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.

Christmas at the Kringles & The Cat and the Hatchet Review

 

That's right. It's another double review! Bet you weren't expecting two in one month. Only unlike the last one both films are horror movies.

Christmas at the Kringles is an action horror comedy that's produced by 19th Hole Productions and Astria Studios with distribution by Briarcliff Entertainment. It's directed by Kevin Lewis and written by Zack Imbrogno.

The story is, Mark & Julie Severson along with their son Bobby move to a suburban neighborhood where they're neighbors with the Kringles, who celebrate Christmas throughout the year. Soon the Seversons become suspicious and unsettled by the Kringles. They soon learn the Kringles are part of a cult that wants to force their new neighbors into their way of life. Now, Mark along with a disgraced mall Santa must join forces in order to free Mark's family.

Initial Reaction

Now originally I didn't know this movie existed. It wasn't until later when I saw an ad on YouTube and decided to give a look. It seemed like it was gonna be a fun little holiday horror flick.

Cons

Oh boy...where do I start? Let's start with the biggest aspects that were marketed (despite me seeing very little marketing), those being the comedy and horror. The comedy fails because the jokes fall flat. I think maybe me and the audience chuckled at one or two moments, but everything else is just terrible. Sometimes it feels like sketches that go on for too long. One moment I remember and I think illustrates that point is two characters are talking about "shit hitting the fan". And when shit hits the fan it's bad. It's really bad when shit hits the fan. Or if shit, actually real shit hits the fan that'd be gross. That was an actual bit in the movie and I felt like it was going on for like ten minutes. So if the comedy sounds disappointing to you, you're not gonna like the horror either. The horror is undercooked. It's not scary. It doesn't provide much turn off your brain entertainment. And when something gory happens it cuts away. I'm serious, other than a decapitation, everything else cuts. Which I don't understand. Because Kevin Lewis directed Willy's Wonderland and that was pretty gory. Not to mention the movie's rated R so it could get away with stuff like that. Then there's the characters. The writing for the characters biggest disservice is the fact they're underwritten. The Severson's have bland family drama so you're not really rooting for them because by the end you know where they're story is gonna go. And when their storyline isn't bland, sometimes they're not likable. The Kringles could've been pretty good villains, especially with their Christmas obsession, but again, the writing doesn't help. They don't have that much menace to them, pretty funny considering they're a cult. But other times they're just generic. Not to mention but sometimes the plot will set stuff up but never go anywhere. One example I can think of is there's something to do with crypto but then it goes nowhere. I guess the filmmakers wanted to make fun of crypto? But I'm pretty sure crypto is low hanging fruit in this day and age.

Middle Ground

I've got nothing.

Pros

I'll give the production design credit. It really captured the Christmas overload that the Kringles has. The excessive design helped support the "toxic positivity" angle very well. I'll also give the cast some credit as well. They're committed to the bit and they looked like they were having fun. It just seems like this is one of those movies where the cast had fun making, but the final product isn't good.

Christmas at the Kringles could've been something fun, but sadly the quality of the writing doesn't live up to that expectation.

My final rating is, Bad.

Now onto the next movie.

The Cat and The Hatchet is a slasher short film that tells a dark reimaging of Dr. Seuss' book, The Cat in the Hat, but also taking a lot of influence from the 2003 live-action film. Production is done by both Prime Capitol Entertainment and Six Side Studios and was distributed on YouTube. Cameron Dodd directed and wrote the story with Kaleb Carmichael.

The story is, siblings Connor and Ellie were messing with each other as siblings do until something quite strange happened. They meet Scratches the Cat and all he wants to do is have fun with the kids. But things turn sinister when Scratches shows what he finds fun.

Initial Reaction

Much like the previous movie I didn't know this existed. But I didn't discover it on YouTube. I scrolling through X on my timeline and Geek Vibes Nation reposted one of the poster. It was then I went to YouTube and watched the teaser. I thought it'd be a good idea to review. Especially since this wouldn't be the first time I reviewed a movie that took a classic Dr. Seuss character and turned him into a horror villain.

Cons

I've got nothing.

Middle Ground

Now let me just say this is actually a really good short film and I'll explain why later. Having said that by the end you do get a proof-of-concept feeling. Granted by the end the director does plug in a Kickstarter, but even without that part of the video you'd still get that feeling. Cause a lot if not all of the hallmarks are there. A strong focus on Scratches' visual/performance hooks and just enough story to show the vibe without having to go with a full narrative arc.

Pros

Alright let's get into the good stuff. Starting with Mark Ricci as Scratches. The guy was great. At first he captures a Cat in the Hat like whimsical charm, and then he was able to capture a more twisted version of that personality. Also, unlike Christmas at the Kringles, this could actually be a little scary. Mainly because Dobb and Carmichael really build tension. There's one scene involving a fish where I was actually wide eyed and wondering if Scratches was gonna rip apart one or both of those kids apart. The last thing I'll praise is the production. Despite a limited budget, Dobb and co. pulled off so much. Especially the Scratches suit. That thing looks creepy even when it's just a still image.

The Cat and The Hatchet is a fun little short film you should give a watch. So much fun I actually do hope Cameron is able to reach his goal of making this a feature length movie.

My final rating is, Good.

Well folks, this sadly wraps up my Halloween themed reviews. But thankfully there's next year. Come back on Monday, Nov 2nd, for my return to the Road to Ice Age: Boiling Point. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day and I hope you're all having a safe and fun day. Happy Halloween 🎃.

Looking Back at the Films of 2025 Part 10 - Shelby Oaks

 

It's another edition of Looking Back at the Films of 2025. This time around I review a movie made by a popular YouTuber.

Why Didn't I See Shelby Oaks?

I was looking forward to this because the guy who made is Chris Stuckmann. He's a YouTube movie critic I once admired. Note that I said admired, as in past tense. When I first discovered he was everything I wanted in a movie critic. He has passion, some good knowledge, and I even enjoyed a lot of his segments on his channel. His Hilariocity reviews are what inspired my Cinematic Disasters movie reviews. I even enjoyed his Retro Rewind videos. I even ranked him #1 on my top 14 internet critics list. But over the years Chris has definitely softened up when it comes to reviewing. At first he decided to stop doing a list of the top worst movies of the year to focus on stuff he actually liked. Okay, little bit of a bummer but I guess it can be trying being negative a lot of times. Then the Madame Web video came out. It was essentially coming to the defense of an obvious bad movie and his argument basically boiled down to "Guys, it's not easy making a movie. So go easy on it". Now it's true. Making movies isn't easy. If if was everybody would be doing it. However, this soft approach to reviewing isn't how Hollywood is gonna get better. I get Chris is now making movies and he doesn't want to come off a dick like he use to be. But there's still a way to tell filmmakers what they're screwing up on without being a jerk about it. Then when that video came out and looking back at how he's basically being more gentle just to secure a filmmaking job, I decided to save a review for Shelby Oaks for later. It wasn't full on heartbroken, but it's still a bummer to see one of your favorite YouTube movie critics feel like they're giving out participation trophies.

What is Shelby Oaks?

Shelby Oaks is a supernatural mystery horror movie that was produced by Paper Street Pictures and Intrepid Pictures with Neon acting as distributor. Chris Stuckmann directed and wrote the story with Samantha Elizabeth.

The story is, a group of paranormal investigating YouTubers called the Paranormal Paranoids consisting of Riley, Laura, David, and Peter were once investigating a prison in the ghost town of Shelby Oaks. Then, they all went missing. Years later Riley's older sister Mia is still looking for her little sister. She starts finding clues but the more and more she finds out, the darker the answers become.

My Thoughts

The Good: The one good aspect is Camille Sullivan. Her performance is a standout. She was very committed to the role of Mia. She sells the devastated side, the grief, and the obsession. She's the human core in an otherwise decent story.

The Bad: I've got nothing.

The Okay: Now since I brought up the story let's dive deeper as to why it's the movie's biggest gray area. The investigation from Mia is a great hook. Whether you're the older or younger sibling, you can relate to wanting to find and protect your sibling. So that part was pretty good, but the story as a whole doesn't really standout. When watching he can feel what films Stuckmann inspired him. One example is the opening. It has a very The Blair Witch Project vibe to it. We also have the themes. Shelby Oaks touches on things such as unresolved childhood trauma, sibling bonds, and how online tragedy can turn into myth. It's good stuff but I don't think it was really explored as much as they could have. Lastly there's the filmmaking. You can definitely tell this is a debut film. Which isn't bad by any means. By the end I know there was competent people behind the camera, while at the same time they still had some kinks to workout.

Final Verdict: Okay.

Overall Shelby Oaks is heartfelt love to horror and Stuckmann has some solid craft but he needs to work on the writing portion more. So, that's all for now. Come back on Saturday, Oct 31st, Halloween! On that day I'll treat you all to a double review! Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.

WNUF Halloween Special Review

 

We're back with more horror movie reviews. This time I'm reviewing something I didn't know existed until I saw it as a thumbnail from an old Doctor Wolfula video.

WNUF Halloween Special is a comedy horror analog film produced by Midnight Crew Studios and was distributed by various companies and various formats. Camp Motion Pictures was for DVDs, before companies like Shudder & Terror Vision distributed it on formats such as VOD, video, and Blu-Ray. But fun fact, before that the filmmakers would self-release via a guerrilla campaign by hiding copies of the movie in places like thrift shops, conventions, and bathroom stalls. They hoped it'd start a successful whisper campaign. Chris LaMartina primary directed both the real story and some of the fake commercials along with other various writers and directors. It'd list them but it'd be a looong list and this part of the review is long enough.

The story is, TV station WNUF airs a Halloween special on Oct 31st, 1987. The special has Reporter Frank Stewart investigating the Webber house where a husband and wife were brutally murdered. But as filming continues Frank along with the others in the group quickly realize they made a horrible mistake.

• Negatives

The only downside with the movie are the commercials. Now they are really well done. They actually do feel like ads for things you'd expect to see on local channels of the 80's. So if the commercials have a good craft to them then why isn't this in "Mix" portion of the review? Well it's simple. Despite the well done craftsmanship there's just far too many. It doesn't help that some of them interrupt Frank's investigation when things start to get interesting.

• Mix

I've got nothing.

• Positives

First let me praise how authentic this looks. The movie looks like something that was from the 80's. But other than hair and clothes, LaMartina and co. went one step further and made the movie look like something that somebody recorded on their camera. It's really good look that helps the movie standout.

Then there's the humor. There's a lot of good jokes regarding spoofing old 80's commercials as previously mentioned, but the humor is mostly subtle. The primary jokes are the news anchors trying to be funny with their quips but they just come off as corny or the awkwardness one would expect from local TV. It's not only funny if you're someone who frequently watches local television, but it also circles back to that authenticity.

Now there's actually not that much horror up until the last couple of moments. Usually that'd piss people off but WNUF does it effectively because they were building up to the big explosive finale for quite a while. And it works due to how the movie has an almost uncanny realism to it.

The last thing I'll praise is Paul Fahrenkopf as Reporter Frank Stewart. Paul at first makes Frank come off as your quirky neighbor or corny uncle depending on how you view the character. But what Paul also does is when the terror gets more and more real, Paul has Frank's real persona as a self-important man. It's great acting from a very unknown actor.

WNUF Halloween Special should definitely be watched as a Halloween viewing essential along the likes of The Thing, Halloween (1978), Trick 'r Treat, among others. It's a fun watch despite the numerous commercials.

My final rating is, Good.

That's all for now. Come back on Thursday, Oct 29th, for a horror edition of Looking Back at the Films of 2025. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.

Clayface Review

 

Alright, it's another installment of the DC Universe. Will this one be better than the previous entires?

Clayface is a body horror thriller that's based on the DC Comics' villain of the same name. It also serves as the third film entry of the DC Universe (DCU). It's produced by DC Studios, 6th & Idaho, Troll Court Entertainment, and The Safran Company with Warner Bros. Pictures as the distributor. Mike Flanagan and Hossein Amini wrote the story while James Watkins directed.

The story is, after his face was disfigured by crime lord Markos Szabo and Szabo also furthers ruins his life by paying people to spread false allegations, actor Matt Hagan feels as though there's nothing left to live for. But this changes when he finds out about Dr. Caitlyn Corr's nanites that can repair damaged tissue and skin. The more and more Matt takes these nanites the more he can shape shift his body, but the treatment also drives Matt mad with vengeance and insanity.

Initial Reaction

Honestly I didn't have any high expectations for this movie. So far the DCU has been a disaster. Everyone has forgotten about Creature Commandos so that should tell you the impact that show had, Superman was decent at best, Supergirl was bad, and Lanterns was the worst show I've seen since Velma. So I really didn't have any faith in this movie despite some good trailers.

Cons

I've got nothing.

Middle Ground

The biggest gray area is the story. First, let me tell you about the good stuff. I truly liked Matt's decent into murderous insanity. It had nice development. First we meet him as an actor who's on top of the world, we see his fall, and by the time it's over he's a full-blown villain and your sympathy for him is gone just like his mind. That was good storytelling. Then we have the other stuff. Other Dr. Corr, who does have a pretty decent story involving her fear that her nanites are dangerous, she also has a good romance story with Matt. But all of the other characters don't get much developed. Sure not every single one should, but they could've given them more memorable personalities. Which none of them do. There's also the fact the revenge/horror elements don't do anything to standout. I mean I was still entertained. Hell, some of the body horror stuff was pretty good. One moment that comes to mind is when Matt has an episode and his eyelids have morphed and had fused together, which makes Matt have to cut them open while the plane he's on is shaking because of the turbulence. That was a truly disturbing moment. But all of the moments whether it's horror or revenge can some familiarity.

Pros

One bit of praise goes to the effects. Especially the practical ones. Matt's disfigured face looks incredible. The makeup on that was perfect. There's also some good GCI when it comes to Matt's shape shifting. And both those elements really added to the body horror side of the movie. But the biggest praise should absolutely go to Tom Rhys Harries' performance. I've never seen this guy in anything before but left a great impression. His range is everywhere. He nailed being charming, devastated, vulnerable, and unhinged. If he doesn't get more starring roles after this it'll be Hollywood's lose.

Clayface was actually a fun experience. While the story has some good aspects in it, it doesn't really break new ground. It's certainly better than previous DCU film entries but in hindsight that's not really saying much.

My final rating is, Good.

That's all for now. Due come back on Monday, Oct 26th, for my review of something I recently discovered called, WNUF Halloween Special. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.

Classic Film Night - American Psycho

 

It's another Classic Film Night review but this time it's once again getting into the Halloween season.

American Psycho is a horror comedy based on Bret Easton Ellis' 1991 novel of the same name. Production was Edward R. Pressman Productions and Muse Productions with Lions Gate Films being the distributor. Mary Harron not only directed by also wrote the screenplay with Guinevere Turner.

The story is, it's 1987 and a New York City investment banker Patrick Bateman has a very polished appearance. He dines at trendy restaurants, has a beautiful apartment, stays in shape, and his friends are as wealthy as he is. But this is all just a façade to hide his deep violent impulses. At first Patrick is able to maintain this demeanor, but soon status envy slowly eats away at him and he starts killing people whether they're homeless, co-workers, or romantic partners.

My Thoughts

One thing that's masterfully done is Mary Harron's directing. Her style is cool, controlled, and sleek. So gives the film an almost glossy look while still showing more darker elements as well. It's kinda like Patrick Bateman. Stylish on the outside, but dark on the inside.

Speaking of Patrick Bateman or in this case the actor who plays him, Christian Bale. Bale's performance is incredible. It's no wonder other than Batman, this is one of his more iconic roles. Bale was fully committed to this role. He absolutely nails being charming one moment, then insane the next. It was entertaining seeing him speak in analytical manner about Huey Lewis and the News' song "Hip to be Square" and then go fully insane and kill someone with an axe. Bale's acting alone is a great reason to watch this movie.

Then there's the dark comedy. There's plenty of truly funny moments. One of my favorites is when Patrick tries to kill a guy in the bathroom, but instead of the guy thinking it's attempted murder he thinks it's Patrick being kinky towards him. That part was absolutely hilarious. Ah the good old days of gay jokes without the filmmakers worrying if somebody is gonna be offended afterwards. Good times. 😆

The last thing I'll praise is the story. Not only does it have a pretty good satire yuppie culture, but it also has a great story of a guy who's losing his mind. But what's so brilliant about the story is because Patrick is such an unreliable narrator, the story cleverly makes you second guess of what events are reliable. Because of people to this day still debate and theorize about Patrick and the story.

You definitely need to give American Psycho a watch. It's horror elements aren't so much about violence even though that's present, but more about how unstable Patrick is. Regardless, it's still a brilliantly made film.

My final rating is, A Must Watch!

I'm all done here. Come back on Saturday, Oct 24th, for my review of the newest DC Universe movie, Clayface. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.

Fan Film Mondays - Halloween Knight Review

It's another Fan Film Mondays. Much like last year, I reviewed a fan film based on an iconic horror franchise. Only that was Friday the 13th, and this time I around we see what happens when Michael Myers and Batman collide.

Halloween Knight is a 2025 fan film based on both the Halloween franchise and the DC Comics' character Batman. It's produced by No Joke Entertainment and was directed by Nicholas Joel Kranick who also wrote the story with R.W. Martin and Adam Parrott.

The story is, it's been 40 years since Michael Myers terrorized innocent people in Haddonfield on Halloween in 1978. The institution that was holding him was shut down and he was scheduled to be transferred to Arkham Asylum, but Michael escaped and his now heading towards Gotham City. However, unlike Haddonfield, Gotham has a dark protector who isn't afraid to go after the purely evil masked killer. That protector being none other than the Dark Knight himself, Batman.

• Negatives

I've got nothing.

• Mix

If there's one thing to slightly criticize but not too harshly it's the fact the movie isn't all that polished. Acting ranges from serviceable or better than you think. Costumes are decent enough. Sometimes the lighting isn't all that consistent, other times it's good other times only slightly decent. The point is there's clearly people capable of working the filmmaking equipment, they just need to keep practicing. But again I'm not gonna be too much of dick to Nicholas and his film. Because 1) It's a fan film and nobody was expecting prime Hollywood material. 2) This was his very first fan film. And everyone's first movie can be rough, fan film or otherwise. And 3) It's very obvious they were working on a tight budget. I think it was estimated this was made for like $15,000. So if Nicholas ever makes a sequel or another fan film, hopefully he'll have more of a budget and his filmmaking skills improved.

• Positives

One positive is the music. While the film may needed some work here and there, I can't say the same thing for the music. The main title music alone sounded like it'd hear from an actual officially licensed movie.

Another good aspect is the fact this was made by passionate fans. First there's plenty of easter eggs. There's a car scene involving an abusive pimp that's clearly taken from The Dark Knight Returns, the Batwave from the 2004 animated series The Batman makes an appearance, some teenage punks are listening to Rob Zombie's song I'm Your Boogieman, which is a nod to the fact Rob Zombie was the director for the remakes of Halloween & Halloween II, and Silver Shamrock masks from Halloween III: Season of the Witch are worn by said teen punks and the Silver Shamrock Halloween jingle can be heard in the background. But other than easter eggs, there's the story. Not only is Batman vs. Michael Myers something I'd expect to here from fan debate, but the writing respects both properties. Michael Myers isn't treated as a joke or some easy obstacle for Batman. He's treated as that purely evil killing machine with no clear motivation for why he's killing people. Meanwhile Batman is written as a detective and hero trying to stop a madman.

So overall a pretty decent fan film. If that sequel does become a thing then I wish Nicholas and his crew the best of luck. If you want to this out go right ahead, but heads up. This is fifty-seven minutes long so watch if you have the time.

My final rating is, a low Good.

That's all for now. Come back on Thursday, Oct 22nd, for my Classic Film Night review of, American Psycho. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.

Street Fighter (2026) Review

 

We got a brand new live-action Street Fighter movie. Will this be the first ever good one or is it gonna be a stinker?

Street Fighter (2026) is a martial arts film based on the iconic Capcom video game series of the same name, and the third live-action adaptation. It's produced by Legendary Pictures with Paramount Pictures acting as thr distributor. Kitao Sakurai directed and wrote the screenplay with T.J. Fixman, while the story was written by Dalan Musson and Gary Dauberman.

The story is, Chun-Li has searched and found both Ryu & Ken and recruits them to the second World Warrior tournament. But what the two don't know is the tournament is a set up by the evil dictator M. Bison so he can steal Ryu's powers.

Initial Reaction

Originally I was skeptical about this movie. The last two Street Fighter movies weren't exactly something to write home about. Then I saw the trailers for this and it seemed like it could be some fun popcorn entertainment. So I decided to give this one its fighting chance.

Cons

The only thing I didn't like about the movie was the humor. I laughed like once throughout the entire movie, everything else was either meh or just plain bad. It doesn't help that at one point the filmmakers want this to be serious then a couple scenes later wants to be funny. I mean it'll give the humor some credit, it didn't go for meta jokes. I think the closest we got was Cammy talking about people loving Chun-Li's thighs and not seeing the big deal. But that was more smack talk than a joke.

Middle Ground

The biggest mix bag is the story. Characters such as Ryu, Ken, and Chun-Li all have stories that's about regret, not feeling good enough, and revenge. So they got some sort of development going on. The rest of the characters not so much. M. Bison is just doing standard villain stuff, which can be kinda fun but nothing that's really gonna blow you away. But all of the other characters such as Guile, Vega, Cammy, etc. are barely used or might as well have been cameos. Now don't get the wrong idea I wasn't expecting every single character to have a deeper story, but if you're gonna use some fan favorites at least give them bigger supporting roles instead of they're here one moment, gone the next, and pop up later. But the biggest letdown was the tournament. Despite being the main reason why a majority of our characters are here it's not used very much. We get maybe two or three tournament fights while the others happen off-screen or a character forfeits with no dramatic tension whatsoever.

Pros

The biggest praise I can give this is, it actually looks and feels like a Street Fighter! The movie doesn't shy away from more fantastical elements of the source material. We get their fighting styles, their special attacks, and the actors and actresses actually look like the characters. This isn't the '94 movie, where the fantastical elements are barely there. And it isn't like Legend of Chun-Li, where the filmmakers are trying to make everything grounded. The movie fully embraces what makes Street Fighter, Street Fighter.

This is deeply flawed video game movie, but at the same time it wasn't terrible or boring.

My final rating is, a low Okay.

That'll wrap things up. Come back on Monday, Oct 19th, for a more spooky edition of Fan Films Mondays. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.

The Host (2006) Review

 

Monday I reviewed the movie Dog Soldiers, a movie that was made outside of the United States. But after I finished that movie I realized I haven't reviewed a non-English movie since The Raid back in 2024. So to fix that I go from Britain to South Korea with a horror flick I've heard about many times but never got around to watching until now. Oh and if you're wonder why I put the year the movie was released is because I didn't want any confusing with that crappy 2013 film with the same name.

The Host is a South Korean monster movie that was produced by Chungeorahm Film and distributed by Showbox. Bong Joon Ho directed and wrote the screenplay along with Ha Joon-won and Baek Chul-hyun.

The story is, in 2000 an American pathologist ordered his Korean assistant to dump hundreds of bottles of formaldehyde down a drain which finds its way to the Han River. Six years later, a mutant monster born from that action is causing havoc and killing people. Caught up in this madness is a family who must find a way to survive this monster and a supposed virus it carries.

• Negatives

The only true negative I can is the CGI. Now design wise the monster looks great. It's a very ugly monster and has a lot of amphibian traits. But the CGI for this thing isn't good plain and simple.

• Mix

I've got nothing.

• Positives

One praise I'll give is the surprising tonal balance. The movie's tone can range from horror to drama to action and comedy. And it's all balance to a great degree. The drama of the dysfunctional actual works instead of cheap tag on. The horror has some good tense, and there were some funny moments that got a laugh out of me. But not only is the tone balanced but because it's so well executed it gives the movie a very unpredictable edge.

Now Joon Ho, Joon-won, and Chul-hyun do dive into social satire by not only taking influence from an actual waste dumping scandal (the McFarland incident) but by dividing into things such as government incompetence, media hysteria, etc. Now unlike today's satire where it's clear the woke writer is playing favorites, Joon Ho and company actually do a good job on their satire because he along with his fellow writers critiqued both the incompetence of the American and Korean government. Because of this not playing favorites attitude you can something that's actually entertaining instead of preachy.

The last praise I'll give is Song Kang-ho's performance for his role as Park Gang-du. His character is a slow-witted clumsy misfit but is also shown to be a caring father. Kang-ho captures both the character's comedic side but he also anchors the film emotionally as well. And when two very big and sad events happen to Park you're actually hoping the guy wins in the end, and that's in part thanks to Kang-ho's performance.

While the CGI isn't good, there's a lot of other aspects to love about The Host.

My final rating is, Good.

That's all for now. Come back on Saturday, Oct 17th, for my review of the newest live-action Street Fighter movie. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.

Underrated Films - Dog Soldiers Review

Alright, we continue the season of spooky with a brand new Underrated Films review.

Dog Soldiers is a British action horror movie that was produced by Kismet Entertainment Group, The Noel Gay Motion Picture Company, Victor Film Company, and Carousel Picture Company with Pathé distributing. Neil Marshall both wrote and directed.

The story is, a squad of British soldiers are into a remote area of the Scottish Highlands to carry out a training exercise against a Special Air Service unit. After the training is over, the soldiers soon find the torn apart remains of the SAS unit. They quickly realize they're being hunted by a pack of werewolves. The soldiers only hope is to fight back and survive until the sun rises.

Why It's Underrated

It's a tale as old as time, a great film that just doesn't get enough attention. I haven't seen a TV showing for this film in years. The last time I remember that is back in I believe 2005 when I was channel surfing and I stumbled upon this film on SciFi (although now it's spelled SyFy). But I can't recall this movie ever getting more showings pass the 2000's on TV or a brand new DVD/Blu-Ray release.

My Thoughts

Now before I start praising this movie let's get something out of the way first. Dog Soldiers doesn't do anything really new in horror or more specifically the werewolf genre. However! The entertainment factor with this is off the charts. Whether it's the intense action, so moments that actually are scary, or those bits of dark comedy, the movie is never ever boring. So despite hitting some familiar beats you'll recognize from other films, there's never a dull moment.

With that slight criticism out of the way let's start the praising. One great thing is the casts' chemistry. These guys actually do feel like soldiers who've been with each other for a long time. Whether they're trash talking each other, talking about football, or telling stories of soldiers they knew but are sadly no longer alive, these guys feel like they have a brotherhood. So when one of them do die it actually does sting quite a lot. So thumbs up to the cast.

There's also the pacing. The movie clocks in at an hour and forty-five minutes but it never felt like that. That whole story beat where the soldiers find the ripped up remains of the SAS happens when you're like twenty-three minutes into the flick. That scene may not be the big main event but the fact we're at the moment where our heroes know something that isn't human killed those men shows that Neil Marshall wasn't wasting everybody's time.

My last praise goes to the special effects, especially on the werewolves. This was released in 2002 thus this movie is twenty-four years old (God that made me feel old typing that) but despite it's age the werewolf effects still hold up. It helps that Marshall chose practical creature effects like costumes and animatronics rather than something made with CGI. Had he gone that route than that really would've shown how low budget the film is, but I digress.

I strongly recommend you all watch Dog Soldiers for your Halloween season. It may hit some familiar territory, but it's a blast to watch.

My final rating is, Great.

That's all for now. Come back on Thursday, Oct 15th, where I'll continue to go outside the United States to find some horror movies to review by giving my thoughts on The Host. Until then, enjoy the rest of your day.