Jordan-M
Joined May 2002
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.
Reviews32
Jordan-M's rating
I remember seeing "House of the Dead" during its initial theatrical run because I had been following the movie's production for quite a while before hand - and it seemed to be very promising. On top of that, I'm a HUGE fan of the games, and that was the main incentive for me to look into it in the first place.
The film in and of itself is a travesty; a jumble of gore, sex, and haphazard character development. Some scenes happen for no reason, other scenes go on much longer than they should, and the overall narrative suffers because of it. An example of the Oscar-worthy script:
RUDY: "You created it all so you could be immortal. WHY?"
CASTILLO: "...To live forever."
A big problem "House of the Dead" suffers from is an identity crisis. Is it a horror movie? Is it an action movie? Is it a love story? Is it a tragedy? Is it a comedy? We may never know.
Acting is a mixed bag, too. Some of the cast are likable, namely "Captain Kirk" who gets all of the one-liners (not to mention the most memorable scenes/kills). The majority of the actors/actresses are just incapable of, well, acting. Sure, this is a B-movie based on a videogame... but are decent characters too much to ask for?
The centerpiece of the movie, a giant battle between the survivors and a small army of zombies, is a novel idea - which is for the most part carried out well. There are only a few things working against it; namely the EXTREME OVERUSE of the 360-degree camera spin. A lot of the time they use it for no reason, and in a way it hurts the action more than it helps. And, when the 7 minute sequence is over, they show it AGAIN in fast-forward for about 10 seconds. Why? Well, I guess they realize how short the typical viewer's attention span is.
All of the complaints aside, it's time to address the GOOD points of the movie. First of all, the zombies. Clearly this is what the most time, money, and care was spent on. Their designs are amazing - some of the best in any zombie movie. Secondly, the effects and look of the film. A lot of the gore, guns, sets and makeup show semi-quality production value. Third, the soundtrack. While it's generally oppressive techno/metal/rap, it definitely suits the movie's overall feel well, and often helps to elevate what's happening onscreen. And, while it's kind of a cheap selling point - the women are very easy on the eyes; namely "Alicia".
After watching the DVD and listening to producer Mark A. Altman's commentary (who happens to be a big fan of the games as well), I felt kind of bad for him because he originally had a LOT of good ideas that were cut from the movie or never even filmed due to budget/time constraints, or director Uwe Boll just not wanting to use them. Had Altman's ideas been carried over, "House of the Dead" could have been FAR better than it ended up.
That said, if you haven't seen this movie yet, you should already know what to expect by now. At most, this goes under the "so bad it's good" category, but even then that's cutting it close. Personally I can still enjoy watching it - which I do - but if you ask me WHY I enjoy it I can't give you a clear answer. If you're brave, rent it first. You may end up almost kind of liking it, like I do.
The film in and of itself is a travesty; a jumble of gore, sex, and haphazard character development. Some scenes happen for no reason, other scenes go on much longer than they should, and the overall narrative suffers because of it. An example of the Oscar-worthy script:
RUDY: "You created it all so you could be immortal. WHY?"
CASTILLO: "...To live forever."
A big problem "House of the Dead" suffers from is an identity crisis. Is it a horror movie? Is it an action movie? Is it a love story? Is it a tragedy? Is it a comedy? We may never know.
Acting is a mixed bag, too. Some of the cast are likable, namely "Captain Kirk" who gets all of the one-liners (not to mention the most memorable scenes/kills). The majority of the actors/actresses are just incapable of, well, acting. Sure, this is a B-movie based on a videogame... but are decent characters too much to ask for?
The centerpiece of the movie, a giant battle between the survivors and a small army of zombies, is a novel idea - which is for the most part carried out well. There are only a few things working against it; namely the EXTREME OVERUSE of the 360-degree camera spin. A lot of the time they use it for no reason, and in a way it hurts the action more than it helps. And, when the 7 minute sequence is over, they show it AGAIN in fast-forward for about 10 seconds. Why? Well, I guess they realize how short the typical viewer's attention span is.
All of the complaints aside, it's time to address the GOOD points of the movie. First of all, the zombies. Clearly this is what the most time, money, and care was spent on. Their designs are amazing - some of the best in any zombie movie. Secondly, the effects and look of the film. A lot of the gore, guns, sets and makeup show semi-quality production value. Third, the soundtrack. While it's generally oppressive techno/metal/rap, it definitely suits the movie's overall feel well, and often helps to elevate what's happening onscreen. And, while it's kind of a cheap selling point - the women are very easy on the eyes; namely "Alicia".
After watching the DVD and listening to producer Mark A. Altman's commentary (who happens to be a big fan of the games as well), I felt kind of bad for him because he originally had a LOT of good ideas that were cut from the movie or never even filmed due to budget/time constraints, or director Uwe Boll just not wanting to use them. Had Altman's ideas been carried over, "House of the Dead" could have been FAR better than it ended up.
That said, if you haven't seen this movie yet, you should already know what to expect by now. At most, this goes under the "so bad it's good" category, but even then that's cutting it close. Personally I can still enjoy watching it - which I do - but if you ask me WHY I enjoy it I can't give you a clear answer. If you're brave, rent it first. You may end up almost kind of liking it, like I do.
"Returner" isn't going to be remembered for it's story. It won't be remembered for it's dramatic value. It probably won't even be remembered for the cool characters. Nope, instead whenever the average moviegoer thinks of "Returner" all they'll remember is the action scenes and how awesome Takeshi Kaneshiro looks in Matrix-wear.
But first things first. There's a movie somewhere inside of these slo-mo shootouts, and it's a fairly decent one at that.
In the future, humanity is being devastated by the Daggra, a nigh-unstoppable alien race. A young girl, the "Returner" of the title, manages to make a jump back in time to October, 2002 and an attempt to figure out just how the alien menace began.
Turns out the Yakuza have taken a stray Daggra baby hostage (for some reason or another). A huge fleet of Daggra ships are on the way to Earth to pick up their little lost lamb. So the girl must find a way to get the alien baby back home before some Japanese mafia guys send it back home in pieces. This is where Kaneshiro's cool assassin guy comes into play. I won't tell you anymore, except for this - I loved the ending. I didn't see it coming from a mile away, and how it brings everything full-circle is excellent.
As for the action scenes, the matrix comparisons are unavoidable... Although in Returner they're done imaginatively enough to retain some freshness. I have to say this - the scene where Millie tosses a mug of water into the air, freezes time and catches the falling water in the mug is still one of the most impressive special effects I've ever seen in my life.
In the end, if you want an action/sci-fi movie that's mainstream, but offbeat enough to keep a unique identity, then go with "Returner". It's highly enjoyable, and just as highly recommended.
But first things first. There's a movie somewhere inside of these slo-mo shootouts, and it's a fairly decent one at that.
In the future, humanity is being devastated by the Daggra, a nigh-unstoppable alien race. A young girl, the "Returner" of the title, manages to make a jump back in time to October, 2002 and an attempt to figure out just how the alien menace began.
Turns out the Yakuza have taken a stray Daggra baby hostage (for some reason or another). A huge fleet of Daggra ships are on the way to Earth to pick up their little lost lamb. So the girl must find a way to get the alien baby back home before some Japanese mafia guys send it back home in pieces. This is where Kaneshiro's cool assassin guy comes into play. I won't tell you anymore, except for this - I loved the ending. I didn't see it coming from a mile away, and how it brings everything full-circle is excellent.
As for the action scenes, the matrix comparisons are unavoidable... Although in Returner they're done imaginatively enough to retain some freshness. I have to say this - the scene where Millie tosses a mug of water into the air, freezes time and catches the falling water in the mug is still one of the most impressive special effects I've ever seen in my life.
In the end, if you want an action/sci-fi movie that's mainstream, but offbeat enough to keep a unique identity, then go with "Returner". It's highly enjoyable, and just as highly recommended.