Film Reviews by Pork Chop Express

I went to the pictures hoping for the best, but fearing the worst after all the critical maulings (including the Cinema Paradiso review on here for example). What I got was an engaging and entertaining origin and standalone DCEU film that drew in a fun final performance from Keaton and a gritty performance from the newly introduced Supergirl character - complete with grumpiness, volnerability, femininity and some badassed fight scenes.

I didn't know what crimes Ezra Miller had meant to have done at the time (after finding out afterwards I can see folks don't have a lot of respect or faith in him) but what gets put up on the screen is acted and directed very well. So it's a shame for all the negativity. I think that is one of the reasons folks didn't turn out for this - knowing that Gunn was going to shoot up the DC universe and that they would have to re-cast the Flash actor anyway didn't help so they're all waiting for pay per view / HBO.

The story and acting are pretty strong, the effects for the best part are excellent and eye popping although I would have to agree the odd frame let's it down on some of the cameo flashback heroes for e.g. (I won't spoil it for you though).

I thought it was rather well done and certainly didn't warrant the critical mauling it got. I'd give it a 7 or 8 out of 10 and because it has had a few hundred millions thrown at the screen (which is obvious when you watch it) it is worth catching on cinema or the biggest / best screen you can see it on. IMAX would have been best.

Ezra really did excel when I think back and his interactions with his younger past self really do make the film.

If only all the DC films had been at the calibre of Man Of Steel, Flash, WonderWoman, Aquaman ... well maybe we would have got to keep our Henry... I don't have anything against James Gunn but the problem with DC movies is Warner Bros pure and simple they need to butt the heck out of it and distribute not direct or produce.

Edris Elba is fairly watchable even with his stupid American accent. The actor who plays the game keeper you will recognise and is fairly entertaining if slightly underplayed when almost mortally wounded. The central character's daughters are written as completely stupid and inept and played by poor actresses.

Basically the actors do the most stupid things to put themselves in danger every 5 mins its really difficult not to get annoyed and start shouting at the screen. Example: fighting a wounded lion whilst in a wounded condition with a knife, getting out of a car when people have been mauled and have died in the road.

The lion effects are great but I wish I hadn't bothered starting to watch this. Really badly written.

I was kind of hoping for better from DC. But this is yet another dud.

With such great characters they just don't seem to be able to make something entertaining any more.

This is a 2 hour over saturated CGI assault on the senses which become numbed and indifferent to all the goings on about 45mins in. Its just TOO much. I found myself just longing to see a few mins where I wasn't looking at an obvious CG character or effect or a backdrop that was CG either.

It felt like half the film was about hits: punches, explosions, objections crashing into each other and things zipping around the screen like the CGI Black Adam.

A parallel universe (I think) which for some reason has the same vans, music, guns and language as us is inexplicably introduced along with a group of improperly introduced superheros with no backstory.

I couldn't care less about the Shazam blarney either. What a load of cobblers. Who wrote that in DC?! Give me Batman - Bale, Keaton or Affleck or Superman - Reeve or Cavill any day of the week..

What it felt to me was a self indulgent product from Dwayne Johnson who acting as producer has tried to make himself look amazing and get all the great lines.

Unfortunately it backfires and you end up enjoying the unknown human supporting cast and a bit of Pierce Brosnan acting much more.

I am so glad I didn't waste my time or money watching this at the pictures.

Taika has gone from an occasionally amusing Ragnarok to this attempt at a big budget Dumb and Dumber. It's feeling like its trying to strain some humour out of content that just really should be engaging and compelling.

Firstly let me tell you I am a Marvel and Superhero fan. I've grown up with Christopher Reeve right through to Tom Holland and seen every single MCU and DCEU film (sometime multiple times... Not Eternals though obviously...) Oh and I really should finish Wakanda Forever but found it extremely boring and disappointing and fell asleep watching it - couldn't be bothered to finish it a month later...). Love Chadwick.. RIP

SPOILERS

Thor has been developed onto a silly comedian from a coming of age maturity film in Thor. To a developing relationship with Jane in DW and then Ragnarok trying to save his people to a film dealing with love, loss and family. Jane has terminal cancer and weilding Moljnir revives her but drains her remaining lifeforce. He also has to battle a cunning character Gor with Godlike power as equally powerful as Thor with an actor with the experience of C Bale which is made little use of.

The interplay with the Guardians at the beginning is embarrassing and unnecessary and the narration by Korg (Taika) is annoying. Jane has become jokey too and this juxtaposes with her terminal dilemmas. Worst of all is a cringey scene with a fat Zeus who somehow has an Eastern European accent and also a couple of goats who pull a flying space barge whilst constantly goat screaming piercingly every few seconds and this gag wears extremely thin quickly.

There are a few things to redeem this which were probably hard boiled into thc original comic story and by screenwriters but really it is spoilt by Taika. DO NOT EVER let this plank back.

What is Kevin Feige doing? I guess we couldn't keep up the quality of the Infinity wars films in Phase 1, 2 and 3 which really feel like the glory days now.

Worth only watching for completeness if you are an MCU film fan

Yeh. You know that I am a bit if a Dune geek now from my title.

I was kind of intrigued / dreading what Villeneuve was going to do to Dune after mauling Bladerunner. I heard he consulted with Lynch and Jodorovski with regard to their made and unmade versions and his. It is a bit of an ask really to both introduce people into this world and then engage people with the characters

Bottom line from me after seeing the unapproved Alan Smithee cut of Dune and comparing it to Lynch's unhappily cut to death theatrical version is that I wish they had got Lynch to film his version in 3 parts. But that's not the way they did things back then really. It was all sequels (think Star Wars)...

Yeh its not too bad but in looks and script and concept I couldn't help but compare to Lynch's superior version throughout.

Yeh it is a little boring. It has pacing issues going too slow and then speeding up so rapidly the untrained Arakis viewer wouldn't have a clue what's going on.

It literally throws the acting talent up there but at even this film's length it struggles to do justice to any of the talent. Mamoa's performance does certainly add a shine whenever he's on screen but our Paul is just a little underwhelming compared to Maclachlan's energetic and joyful performance.

Kyle had grown up reading and revering Paul Atreides and relished the chance to play this character. And for me that's what is missing in this film is a collected / assembled cast who are generally enjoying what they are doing individually and together.

It makes what goes up on screen a little bit dull. The effects and CGI are spectular although can be a little bland and muted hues compared to Lynch's more flamboyant version. And yes it does struggle in my view with being a 2 part film I think. I don't know how I would have done it but I feel Peter Jackson's approach on LOTR might have worked here maybe.

On the whole it's not bad just maybe a bit dull and boring... Now Jodorovski's version... What vould have been...?

It's worth a look but fails in my view to add anything too new maybe other than the ornithopters and the worms which look great.

In view of the 3 star review below I thought I would send out a further polite caution to any fans of the first movie.

This movie is poor. It takes ages to get going. I think the development of Poirot's character is kind of irrelevant unless they're gone to make more. Whereas the 1st film seemed to centre on the AMAZING ensemble cast of characters and their stories and feelings this 2nd film puts Poirot at the centre. But it's just not that necessary.

I would also suggest that the original film's actors and actresses were of a completely different calibre - Michelle Pfieffer, Johnny Depp, Willem Dafoe, Judi Dench, Derek Jacobi, Josh Gad - charismatic stars that can really act. Contrast to the wooden Gal Gadot and annoying Dawn French or slightly engaging Annette Benning - you know you are on a different level.

None of the Egypt scenes were shot in Egypt. They were all CGI'd and filmed in somewhere a lot less exotic and it shows.

The actual murder only occurs probably well over half way through and to be fair its just not that exciting enough to watch Gal Gadot's performance. She should stick to more one-dimensional characters such as Wonder Woman for e.g. which works really well for her.

I do find Kenneth Branagh's Poirot watchable and this gives the film some interest but it just doesn't work as a whole film. It's not an action film and you can probably either guess the culprit or remember it (if you're over 45 and remember the 1978 version). So, the acting and characters have got to grab you. And they just don't...

I was hoping they might make a 3rd Poirot to redeem this one. But I don't see anything to support that on the web. So just like the lack and quality of the score and acting it is extremely disappointing and nothing really to redeem it - a minor upbeat note at the very end of the film but it can't overcome the downbeats, drab score and anti-climatic reveal. It looks like they've killed the Franchise on this one. Kind of feels like a theme at the moment with the Bond Films for e.g.

A sad death indeed for such a promising engaging start...

I heard a lot of good things about this Candyman sequel. I had really high hopes. But really it lacked Tony Todd's fine performance and to some degree Virginia Madsen as well (I just remember thinking that she was depicting this really bullish individual who had the courage to press on when any normal person would have turned back - and she sold it really well!) Although I do think the main victim / villian is actually a good actor.

I had no objection with the Candyman in the original being black or indeed the use of any black actors and actresses throughout any of the Candyman films. For me I don't choose to watch films based on the colour of any actors skin white or black or any other colour shade or ethnicity. It's very disappointing that I feel I have to write this to anyone who just actually wants to watch a good horror film and not a 100min political woke statement.

The political slant on racism against black people really gets in the way of developing any of the characters and confuses any scares or horror with overt political statements. I have never heard the term "gentrification" so many times in one movie - and to be honest as I've never really used that word myself in written or verbal form before, I am still not quite sure what it really means. But there you have it... using pontsy words against a backdrop of literal surrealistic arty depictions the tension and horror are lost on me really.

I re-watched the original again 3 months ago and this really is a poor relation.

Tony Todd should have featured more strongly and the central artist character and their body horror struggle would have actually been quite interesting (if not somewhat similar to 1986's The Fly). It's not something I would ever re-visit. Very Disappointed. You have been warned!

I couldn't give it 5 stars as alas it does not age well.

But its an amusing romp for 100mins and there is a bit of a budget up there on the screen.

Michael Crawford brings the humour and an appalling American accent and a preposterous liaison with the gorgeous former Bond girl Barbara Carrera. It's a fun chase movie essentially with car chases and a climatic speedboat chase with lasers.

It's littered with the usual Q gadgets from Bond and you even get a few brief scenes from Oliver Reed and somd pretty good practical stunts. It is certainly watchable, but do excuse the dodgy green screen overtaken even by the effects from the Superman movies.

I was expecting this to be pants.

Actually it wasn't.

The lead martial artist is actually very capable and does have some degree of charisma.

The end fight is completely unbelievable but of course (Tong Po) we expected that anywatly.

Higher production values than you would think and excellent cameo performances from the fighter.

Van Damme is again relegated to his trainer role and his looks are fading so you might be disappointed if you want to see a van Damme movie. Cuz this isn't it.

But the fight scenes and technique are excellent and no wire work on offer that I saw.

I was pleasantly surprised being an 80's martial arts film fan... good deal.

I remember watching this when I was a kid. It scared the pants off me. Tobe Hooper happens to have directed Texas Chainsaw. It has the involvement of Spielberg I believe somewhere and ILM and I think the former was at odds with Hooper's dark vision! There is of course the tale of Hooper supposedly using real cadavers from a local mortuary / college for some of the end scenes.

The effects are amazing and ILM lends itself to the very spectral feel of them. But a lot of the poltergeist effects are highly practical and the music complements the direction by building emotion and a sense of dread which helps the audience really care about this normal American family.

The shocks are there. Its really creepy. And because we care and become invested in the family we really want them to be able to overcome their supernatural adversary.

It is not really for the 12A type audience more of a 12+ audience (don't say I didn't warn you). Don't even bother to see the 2015 remake. It is pantsy! The father's humour is misplaced and as a result you can't take anything that happens to the family seriously. Everything is better in the original: screenplay, direction, photography, sound, music, cast, characters, SFX, Practical effects, etc, etc

If you like engaging spooky thrillers you will not be disappointed. Don't forget the classics!

Tried to watch this twice. Fell asleep both times around 10-15mins in. Pretty boring affair. Glenn Close was wasted. Poor script. Unengaging. Music and scoring non-existent as far as I could [hear]. Avoid unless needing a sleep relaxant.

What can I say... Firstly I am a fan of the original - i.e. I actually had a poster of the original film in my student digs all through uni and have seen most of the different cuts and special features of the original. A film noir detective film in the future with robots, Vangelis, great acting and a thought provoking sci-fi element with of course ground breaking production design, FX and sets / costumes.

Contrast with the new 'improved' blade runner. The sparkly neon sets and lighting are gone. Replaced by bleak, unpopulated landscapes, lazily decorated casino interiors, big polystyrene naked women statues, rubbish heaps (yes - scrap yard rubbish heaps!), 80's warehouses and city scapes filled with smog and boring advertising hoardings with drole 80 ft high hologram projected brands and scantily clad women.

Forget Harrison, he's only in it about 20 mins or so. A quiet, pretty boy (Gosling) has taken over and he has to carry the first 2hrs (yes ... 2 hrs of slow scant plot). No humour. Very little acting. No style. No film noir. Not even that much detective story either. In fact very few older replicants to retire until a large mob turn up at the end but after I had fallen asleep and tried to re-watch the bit I had fallen asleep in it still wasn't clear what version of Nexus replicant they were anyway.

Gosling has an embarrassing love scene with a robot hologram. Harrison gets to look old. They shoot a cloned Rachel in the head. There is no real villain until the end really when we work out the main adversary is really a lady replicant who for 3 quarters of the film has been running a CEO's office.

Android has baby. ? What?!? Pantsy...

Music replaced with other electronic music. Which for the most part isn't too bad at least it fits the film. But is in no way beautiful like Vangelis hauntingly beautiful score. And every 5 mins or so a truly awful electronic horn-burp is blarred into your speakers for some reason whilst in the LA scenes...

Ending: Gosling dies on some steps (after saving Deckard) lying in the snow. The scene could have been shot outside my local museum not on top of a high rise surrounded by futuristic neon hoardings etc in the rain as per the orig.

It is pants..!. Captain underpants!

Ridley Scott even admitted he could have shaved off 30mins fairly easily. Give it to me and I could have turned it into a 30min special feature to tag onto the back of the vastly superior original. In fact, me and the missus started to comment on how much we could have cut out of some of the scenes as we watched it. The side story with K's hologram girlfriend is unnecessary and cringy for e.g. It comes in at 2hr53mins I think I read. Way too long.

It is just bad. Soooo bad. I could cry but then... my tears would be lost in time... like tears in the rain.

For SHAME!!!

This was horrific. I fell asleep at the first go of watching this. Nothing made sense. I didn't care about any of the characters. Anthony Hopkins was laughable. The posh Megan-Fox-alike-(+10yrs) was okay looking but no Megan Fox and wooden as an actress. It misses the Whitwicky character I think. Without the main human character this is nothing to tie it together.

In terms of metal on metal action go and watch your local dustcart on its rounds - its way better than this!

In the end I honestly didn't care about what was going on. This has put the nail in the coffin of me watching any further Transformers films. Best stick to the first 2 movies if you like this kind of thing.

Contains Spoilers!:

Like it or not, this is one of the highest grossing film franchises of all time. I actually found this better than people are saying on here. Action is good. I guess it maybe doesn't tick the box in the scares department. It is a shame they blew away all the former characters barring Wesker, Alice and Claire - but I thought finishing the series (which actually has 6 films as far as I know - not as described above) in the Hive back in Raccoon City was a masterstroke. There is a story but it is a bit weak. They do bring in a few new creations and concepts though so its not all re-hashed.

I did like the doctor villain from the 3rd movie but it was pretty silly to resurrect him. And it was a shame we never got to see the Wesker / Alice scrap the fans were really waiting for.

Personally I didn't like the opening. If they could have played out some of that battle on the White House "lawn" that would have been ace, but due to budget constraints they obviously wussed out of that idea. Not a patch on any of the other openings which included the slow-mo reverse sea tanker attack if you think back.

No I can't see them making any more. It's done and the conclusion was satisfactory in my view.

'Her name was Alice'. 'And [now] she remembers everything.'

I think I watched the producing team from Fast & Furious finally cook their own goose after saving it with Fast 4 and seemingly getting better and better.

It is just silly. Silly. Silly. Silly.

1) Focus seems to move away from the cars to focus on the Rock and Stath fighting and shooting off guns

2) Having 2 hackers in 1 team is nonsensical

3) How can Dom and the gang so quickly forgive the Shaw gang when one of them endanger the life of his missus and helped kill off Gal Gadot's character in Fast 6. And Stath's character killed off Han as well. Now they are clowning around with Dom's baby son and acting like they properly weren't trying to outright kill each other previously. All's forgiven... of course I trust you.

4) ... just have a chat with my mum - Peggy Mitchell from the Queen Vic (oh sorry I mean Helen Mirren that staple of high octane action films)...

5) Submarines are faster than we think but I seriously don't think they would win out in a race against a jeep on ice...

6) How does a tank keep pace with a lambo?

7) What was that lame scene in where Hobbs coaches his daughter's football team and jokingly insults an FBI agent for 4 mins... yawn...

8) Why do we open the film with such a mundane chase... compared to a car and train chase or an artic and fuel robbery etc..