I, Da Ca$hman's Movie Reviews

U Can't Beat Me Man!

How will the Merry Jolly stuff be organized?

Chronologically. You will see Psycho (1960) above Frankenstein (1931) if I do those reviews at some point.

Ratings System

Ratings tend to not be the best indicators of opinions - for a better understanding read the entire review. However, ratings are also quick. So here is a quick legend of what these ratings might mean. Note that if there are multiple options, these options can merge in the hurricane that is my mentality.vAll ratings are made with both objective quality of the movie and personal opinion in mind. Reviews are made looking for all aspects of the movies, however seeking the positives as a priority over the negatives. If my rankings were chosen with a different method, this list would be entirely different.

0/5 - Nothing going for this movie. Example: A.V.P.:R.-Un:R[4.0]]{BETA}

1/5 - Barely anything going for this movie. Example: Batman & Robin

2/5 - Option A. Overrated. Example: The Amazing Spiderman. Option B. Had a lot of potential but it didn't fall through. Example: Alice in Wonderland (2010) Option C. Nothing new, nothing special, and synthetic. Example: Dolphin Tale. Option D. At least they tried. Example: Alien 3

3/5 - Option A. Cheesy and Fun, the best and worst of Popcorn Entertainment. Example: Piranaconda Option B. Good, Okay, but nothing that I even recommend by any stretch of the imagination. Just check it out if you're bored to death. Example: Highlander

3.5/5 - Very good, enjoyable. It's a fun time, and I recommend it, but don't rush out to the theaters. Something you would rent on Netflix. Example: Dracula 2000

3.8/5 Close to awesome but just great. Example: Iron Man

4/5 - Awesome but not perfect. Example: Batman Returns

5/5 - Between 90% done overtly well or 95% done well. Example: Batman Begins

5.5/5 - 95% Done overtly well or 100% done well. Example - Return of the Jedi

6/5 - Beyond Perfection. 100% done overtly well. Example: Cloverfield

All decimals represent a space in between these ratings.


They are available, however keep in mind I have my own schedules of movie reviewing and there are movies that I have reviewed on a now dead  YouTube Channel and some movies I have reviewed on my regular YouTube Channel. You may also post requests in Contact Us or the Request form on my YouTube Page.

Movies, Books and Video Games I did not get to reviewing this year:

Salaam Bombay! - 6/5

Lord of the Flies (book) - 5.78/5

Super Mario World - 4.9/5

A Dog of Flanders - 3.48/5

Angels & Demons - 2/5

Machete -4.5/5

Scott Pilgrim vs. The World (Incomplete) - 4.5/5

AVGN vs. NC Trilogy (Incomplete and probably never would have been since it is an ongoing series.) - 5/5

Psycho - 5/5

The Wolfman (2010) - 4/5

Percy Jackson & The Olympians - 3.6/5

Ratings are very crude due to no review. They were just a gut reaction.

Re-Cap on the Anniversary Marathons:

Apollo 13 (15th Anniversary)

Back to the Future Series (25th Anniversary)

Battlefield Earth (10th Anniversary)

Better Off Dead (25th Anniversary)

Black Friday (70th Anniversary)

Commando (25th Anniversary)

Five Gamera Films (45th Anniversary)

Frankenstein (100th Anniversary)

Friday the 13th Series (30th Anniversary)

Jaws Series (35th Anniversary)

Jumanji (15th Anniversary)

Kill For Thrill (10th Anniversary)

Return to Oz (25th Anniversary) (Counts because it is NOT a sequel to Wizard of Oz after all.)

Space Amoeba (40th Anniversary)

The Brides of Dracula (50th Anniversary) (Counts because it is common said to NOT be a part of Hammer's Dracula Series, because there is no Dracula in it.)

The Deader The Better (25th Anniversary)

The Goonies (25th Anniversary)

Toy Story Series (15th Anniversary)

Ad Space

The Green Hornet (2011)

I did not expect to like this movie as much as I did.

Most people looking from the trailer are going to think that this movie will be focused on comedy while giving some sort of attention to low-grade action. WRONG ANSWER! This movie is a light-hearted action-drama that focuses on action first, drama second and a light hearted atmosphere third. The main thing so great about this movie is the characters. The first character, Britt Reid, starts out a spoiled schmuck, turns into a rich schmuck, and then turns into a cocky character who one still might be able to like. Throughout the movie he is still relatable in how we all have our flaws, but he soon becomes too used to the attention and fleshes out his ego-maniac self.

At the very end, he turns back into the cocky character. While this cocky character who is shown throughout most of the film is a very, very, very  interesting character who isn't as annoying as most cocky characters, when we see the schmuck that is fleshed out through the son of James, we really feel against the character and want to see some retribution and/or change. (He sort of gets both.) Kato is a fre@k1ng Bad@$$. He can do everything awesome, from Kicking @$$ to making a coffee! He is an amazing karate fighter and a well-developed character who one can feel with. All the characters in this movie all have their development time, and they are treated like royalty by the writing.

One reason why is because the star who plays Britt Reid, Seth Rogen, wrote this movie as well! I had no idea such a stupid person would be able to write something so awesome and well-developed. The atmosphere in this movie is wonderfully contrasted, with bright sunny days during the Britt Reid scenes and a dark, mysterious atmosphere during the Green Hornet scenes. Most people will be sick of 3-D, at it's abuse and overuse. People who want to see good 3-D will be glad to here though it's converted it's the best 3-D I've seen since November of 2009.

The action worked extremely well. It wasn't lowest common denominator crap, it's fast-paced, ballsy, sometimes dark and sometimes fun. A great mix of different types of action all kept me on the edge of my seat. The film actually had some very political undertones, but it didn't shove it down your throat, and only used it to the extent of the plot. That said, the extent of the plot allowed for a lot of political undertone. It sends a mixed message, however, I guess saying "do what's right whenever you can, but sometimes you just gotta think about keeping yourself alive. Good cannot always prevail." 

The dialogue is very funny at certain points, and at other points it's very dramatic. One reason why the characters are so awesome is because of the dialogue, which brings the characters out full and fleshed. All in all, this film was very well made. It's a weird mix of Back to the Future and Iron Man. I already think it's going to be one of the best films of the year. It has it's weaknesses, but it's not that kind of film. All in all, 4.2/5.

Gulliver's Travels (2010)

Well Wouldya Looket Dat!

So, it's already time for me to review a movie I reported in the news. That just tells you how long this unawaited hiatus of the news was. I was pleased with Clash of the Titans, the first time I did a first review of a News article, would this turn out the same or differently? As I expected, I was displeased. Now, some of you may think it's funny. YOUR WRONG. It's what I call the virus-of-theater phenomenon. The general public (especially the target audience), when going into something, will usually enjoy it. It's rare that your everyday person will not enjoy a movie, let alone a child under 13. So when a critic goes into a movie during a regular showing, he naturally hears all the "ooos", "aaahs", "hahas", "haaas", "aawws" and chitter chatter.

This effects an audience member's judgment severely. The ooos and haaas make you think what you just saw was shocking, no matter what. The "hahas" make you think what you just saw is funny, no matter what. The aaawws make you feel like what you just saw was sad, no matter what. And the constant chitter chatter makes you feel like you can't enjoy this movie no matter what. And this of course isn't even counting the bodily functions and what you miss while you use your bodily functions. This movie had that phenomenon. Luckily any critic with a full brain can realize that what they just saw may or may not be what they though, and that gut reaction was only caused by the audience reaction.

With that said, let's delve into it. Children's movies are also going through a weird phenomenon, when writers think that they haft to get into the mind of a child in order to write a child's story. BULL $#!T! That's the worst way to write, that means YOU ARE FORGETTING WHAT YOU LEARNED IN FILM SCHOOL! And that's what this movie had, child like writing. This movie also had cliche and so stupid acting, this movie was directed terribly, and the soundtrack is just...either nonexistant or terrible. The numerous pop culture cliches make it seem like it needed to rely on other sources to have a movie, and not actually stand it's own ground.

It really targeted everything. Titanic, Avatar, Star Wars, X-Men, I mean holy crap. AND IT'S FREAKING BASED OFF A BOOK! That's what pissed me off the worst, that it's based off a book, and for two reasons. One - this movie completely takes the integrity away from the original. Two - this movie abandoned the third chapter, barely touched the second chapter and only focused on the first chapter. Even not reading the book, it's so freaking easy to spot all the differences from the book to the movie. Like how about turning Liliput into New York, or how about Giant Robots?

Yeah, it's supposed to be present day, but don't go crazy! Make it still feel honorable dang it! And no, it doesn't get the "it created something different with some inspiration" excuse/reason I made up, because what it creates IS A LOAD OF GARBAGE! You're probably gonna expect me to give it a 0 aren't you? Well, I can tell you that the cinematography, special effects, set design and 3-D were are very well done. In other words: go for the visual effects, but don't expect to have spent your hour and a half wisely.

Final Verdict? This movie is a good looking load of garbage. 1/5. (That's right, haven't given that rating since the Summer haven't it?)

I, Da Ca$hman signing off.

True Grit (2010)

It's a remake of an adaptation. Needless to say, I have not seen the original True Grit or read the book.

You know when you see a movie, and then something happens, and that's all you can think about and you can't really think about the movie? Yeah, I had one of those. But I ain't gonna share it with you. So let's just dive in, and if this is a little short, it's because of that event. I think the only thing that even remotely holds this movie back is that it is very conventional. Not cliche, just conventional. This is logically because it is a remake of a 1969 movie that was an adaptation of a 1968 novel. So it stands to reason that the source material would be very conventional, since it wasn't just as conventional back in the late 60's. 

That aside, let's get onto everything good about this movie. For one, the acting was awesome - dare I say - phenomenal. Hailee Steinfield plays Mattie Ross, and she is able to play a Bad@$$ 14 year old girl! THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN MUCH! And her acting doesn't feel forced. While sometimes she seems a bit annoying, it's okay because she is a 14 year old girl. For the most part, she is one Bad@$$ son - I mean daughter - of a gun! Jeff Bridges also plays a very Bad@$$ character, Rooster Cogburn. However with Mattie, who is Bad@$$ with a side of annoying, Rooster is Bad@$$ with two sides of old and fat. Personally, I choose Rooster.

The acting in this movie makes the characters, in some weird fashion or another. Matt Damon plays Texas Ranger La Beef (Yeah, I know it's Boeuf, his names La Beef dang it!) His acting doesn't stand out, however is still spotless. He does exactly what he needs to do. End of story. Josh Brolin plays Tom Chaney, and he is not exactly how I expected him to be. We expected a ruthless killer who would haunt your dreams for seven days and thirty nights. What we got, was a stupid @$$ killer who comes off as "Bad@$$ retard." This isn't necessarily a bad thing, I still think the character is good, but they could have done better for the main antagonist who has been hiding out in the woods all this time.

Now with the acting and characters aside, let's get onto the other things. This is a VERY adult movie. It should be clear to not take the little ones to the movie, but it is a cowboy movie, so who knows what will happen? The movie has tons of shooting, blood, drinking, smoking, suggestive themes, disgusting images, and very adult material in general. However it is not a gore fest. Everything I just listed is used properly. The shooting is used for suspense. The blood is used to keep you knowing just how ugly the life is of people who are A. Bounty Hunters or B. Lost of family. 

The drinking and smoking is used to show just how much of a mess Rooster is. The suggestive themes are used to show how everybody is out for themselves in the wild, wild west. The disturbing images are used in the same light as blood, and the adult material in general is used for balls. BALLS are what movies need! The cinematography is absolutely one hundred and ten percent beautiful, suspenseful, artful and used every single way possible to make this movie just even more freaking awesome. According to what I saw, this movie had about nine producers, including my favorite movie maker of all time, Steven Spielberg. That's a lot for a Western, but it doesn't go to waste at all.

The writing is very well done. It's rare when a movie can have you laughing along with the characters one moment and then HOLY CRAP you're on the edge of your seat because someone just got shot and there's blood and holy macrool run for your life Rooster! RUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUN!!!!! ...  This is of course an example, I did not actually scream in the movie theater. The music/soundtrack was spot on, it stayed in my head and affected both the movie and me to a huge extent. It made the movie even MORE awesome. This movie just had EVERYTHING done right! I don't even mind it's conventional! It is one of the most awesome, artful, well done movies of the entire year!


I, Da Ca$hman signing off!!!

Tron: Legacy 3D (2010)

It’s been 28 years, is it worth waiting this long?


The long in the short of it is this - no movie is worth waiting 28 years for! But is it good? Several critics  have said several things. The general consensus on Rotten Tomatoes is that it is a stupid movie filled with special effects. BlazeTheMovieFan said that they gave it a good shot, but the only thing they did good was, again, the special effects. This gave me an Avatar impression. However, JeremyJahns said that the special effects were the weak point, and the movie was overral fun and impressive. His direct quote was "Hey wouldn't it be cool if they remade Tron? You know, that 80's movie that was about going into video games? They did, it's called Tron: Legacy." Brad Jones of cinema snob fame said that the movie was a total 80's movie and should be seen the Nostalgic factor.

So who did I agree with? If I agreed with any of them? I'm here to tell you that they all bring valid points to the table, but they don't reach my general opinion of the film. The most important thing to a film is a storyline. The storyline is about Kevin Flynn's son, Sam Flynn, trying to find his father who has been lost for ages. I will tell you right here, there is a lot more complexity to the storyline then what I just told you. There is arguments and controversies between other characters and themselves. That plotline itself is very cliche and nothing special. However it is carried out when intertwined with another classic storyline of *MINOR, MINOR, MINOR SPOILERS* slavery. Yes, it appears that the old system has resurfaced. *MMM SPOILERS OVER*.

But I'm not telling you who has done this. After all, in the first Tron, they are able to kill the Master Control Program! These two story lines intertwine almost perfectly, presenting something new and fresh while still having that feeling "I know this storyline." It doesn't strive to be something new, it strives to be something great! Along with intertwining these story lines, this movie heavily revolves around the characters. While Sam Flynn could have been a lot better, I think we should all remember the characters from the original Tron weren't so old and wise either. I'm not gonna nit pick about how Sam is youthful. That said, the new Kevin Flynn is really well done. However, I think there is some potential that could be unlocked from this character, and he sometimes comes off as a bit whiny.

For such an old and wise man. He still does his job, just not the best. All the characters are very well crafted, but they still have room for improvement. Now let's talk about the directing and writing. This is the general feeling: the director was extremely serious about this film, but the writer was having lots of fun. While this mix is something that most people aren't used to, it still creates a very awesome movie that helps the atmosphere. The atmosphere is a very dark atmosphere but there is still a glimmering light in all the darkness, figuratively and literally. You'll understand WHEN you see it.

The dialogue is sometimes very well done, and sometimes very cheesy. But it's cheesy in a way of 80's/50's B-Movie cheesy, not the annoying type of cheesy. The action scenes had me at the edge of my freaking seat! If there's one thing you want to see this movie for, it's the suspense and thrill factor! As for the ending, I will talk about it without spoilers as best as possible. You don't really feel like much got resolved on the outside and in the long run. But the characters were able to unlock knowledge and feelings that they didn't know they had before, and the digital world was more at peace. This movie was not about closing the Tron doors in a storyline way.

It was about closing the Tron doors in a characterization and dramatic way. I will admit it, the special effects were beautiful. They weren't realistic, but they are beautiful. Similar to the original Tron. But then again, Tron was made in 1982, and this was made in 2010, a year after Avatar. The soundtrack was absolutely fascinating! It (in a certain fashion) lives up to the original soundtrack of the original Tron. It totally amplifies the atmosphere into the utter stratosphere! The acting was a little far fetched, but they still were able to portray the characters in a way that was both fun and disturbing (and we're not talking Friday the 13th either.) The cinematography was great, lots of angles and lots of cuts that WERE appropriate.

The pacing of this movie was very fast, however there are some scenes that leave you wishing for more. They can be kind of underwhelming. But it doesn't compare to the amount of awesome stuff there is in this movie! There is also a lot of nods to the fans of the original, including very small details that will just punch you in the face with nostalgia! Overall, this movie was a fun, character driven, clever movie with great special effects. Although this movie doesn't live up to the experience we had in the 1980's with Tron, it is still spectacular and a great conclusion to the series. 4.79/5

Garry Potter 7: The Old Marshmallow - Part Fun (2010)

...As Keaton/Jastuk/Tachin/Teh93rdSpartan/Supdawg would say...OMG TEH EPICNESS!!!!

This is one of those extremely rare films that is not meant to be taken seriously but is very serious. There, I just blew your mind. Enjoy your pancakes Guiyii. It's just a whole load of epicness. So, if you're expecting a film that will change film to any degree, than your not going to get it. The only way you can argue that this movie actually contributes to the growth of the art is ending Harry Potter, which is huge considering it's one of those series like Friday the 13th that NEVER ENDS! (20 years from now - Frodo and Gandalf vs. Harry Potter and Dumbledoor.) However, this is a film meant to contribute to Harry Potter, not to film.

The only way this film is self-aware, is not to "appeal to the common denominator", "cash in" or "change film for the better/worse." It is self aware in "THIS IS HARRY POTTER D@MMIT! WE'RE GONNA END IT RIGHT...with epicness." And boy did they do that. They had everything that an "Epic Movie" needs. Requirement Number 1: a deadly and Nazi Germany like setting that is almost unbeatable but is - at least we hope- beatable by the greatest of warriors. Number 2: All the main characters reprise roles with all the right actors in ways that change the mentally of the character in such an emotional way. This is met with Drako Malfowey (I DO NOT KNOW HOW TO SPELL DOSE NAMES!)

All I'm gonna tell you is this is met with Drako Malfowey. I'm not gonna tell you how, but you should be able to guess. As for other characters, it is met with the three big protagonists Harry, Hermione and Ron. I'm not gonna tell you how, but they all go through huge transitions that are both heart wrenching and epic as characters. Number 3: TONS OF PLOT TWISTS. There are so freaking many! Number 4: Death of a main character. This is carried through the sixth one and a new one happens in this one. (THERE IS NO ALTERNATE ENDING.) Number 5: Thrilling, Epic, Awesome and yes Scary action scenes. CHECK! Finally, Number 6:

The main antagonist doing something we don't expect and then yelling to the Gods leaving us on a cliffhanger. CHECK AND MATE! Those are the six requirements for an epic film. This film fills them all. And being an epic film doesn't make it a bad film, it just doesn't look like a real movie. Not to mention, an epic film NEEDS to be a sequel, so something that starts a series can't be an epic film. (One reason why I say Freddy vs. Jason is the only FT13TH/ANOES film better than the originals.) This also ISN'T FOR KIDS. HARRY POTTER HAS EVOLVED. It is rated PG-13, and films like this and Jonah Hex make me think more and more that we need a 15+ Rating.

In fact, I believe they have that in England. Yeah, they do. Canada and England...best countries in the world...*Gets hit in the head by McCain, Bush, and Obama.* OKAY, OKAY! AMERICA IS AWESOME! I can't say I can say anymore than what I have said, being that this is the example of an epic film of today's cinema.

UPDATE: I was wrong, there is more to talk about. First, some negatives that I stupidly forgot to mention. If you're like the most hardcore Potter fan ever, and will not except anything out of the norm, you will hate this film. Also, there is a lot of shaky cam. I have realized that there is an eighth requirement for an epic film: a song with epic choir, electric guitar and piano. That combination does NOT appear in this film, meaning that it only fits to 7/8ths of its requirement. There are also some points made by characters that are extremely important but fly by and you never really  understand the impact of these moments. 

Those little nit picks are not something to make you wanna go away from this film. It is EPIC.

The Rating? Textbook it doesn't deserve much...WHICH IS WHY THE TEXTBOOK IS BEING THROWN OUT THE WINDOW! 4.85/5 (And that's as an epic film.)

Unstoppable (2010)

Quality awesomeness.

Where do I start? Well, I might as well tell you the plot of the movie, since it seems very unknown. (NAO DAT'S A NEW 4 ME!) The plot is that a half a mile long train spins out of control going at some points 75 miles per hour towards the Stanton, Pennsylvania curve. Now that sounds like something you cannot mess up. You could go total drama, you could go total action, you could go drama and action, you could go for horror, you could go for horror drama, horror action, THERE'S SO MANY POSSIBILITIES! Luckily this movie did not let down. It's full of suspense, heart-pounding action, emotional moments, great characters and even some visual symbolism.

This movie has a huge advantage over the majority of action, suspense and horror. How? This could happen any day. I'm dead serious. You could say that a Psycho (1960) situation could happen any day, but what are the chances it's gonna happen to YOU? Plus, there are ALWAYS plot holes in those kinds of movies, to make it a movie. Even Angels & Demons, which CAN happen absolutely, has numerous plot holes. And I'm not talking about the glass of beer changed amounts spontaneously, I'm talking about major plot holes. Like "THIS CANNOT HAPPEN IN REAL LIFE!"

This movie does two things right: does not have any major or medium plot holes, and is completely realistic. Yet it remains to be a thrilling experience, and the two key good steps actually help that. It's a movie that actually gets us scared, because this is a huge event, that could potentially kill tons of people AND destroy the lives of characters we all loved within the first set of ten minutes. *Cough*SEQUEL: 9/11: THE MOVIE*Cough.* Wait...hasn't that been done? Yes, but as a documentary. I'm just saying, this could happen any day, and the world would be changed forever.

That's enough a reason to go see this movie. But let's get on with it. While the film takes time to develop characters, it doesn't do it all in one sitting. Unlike a lot of lazy but good intentioned movies. Throughout the movie, events occur that both develop the character and help the storyline progress, unless it is an event that is absolutely amazing and heart wrenching. Hint: THE FILMMAKERS KNEW WHAT THEY WERE DOING! When did that happen recently in times of the days? The Cinematography is absolutely beautiful, it feels like they mixed epicness with heart-wrenching in a blender with a camera and came out with this!

The soundtrack is amazing. In Iron Man 2, (STILL NEED TO REREVIEW IT,) they used a cheesy soundtrack. Both kinds of cheesy, bad intentions and good intentions. Rock and Roll but oddly placed, sort of like this was a fan sequel to the first Iron Man. In most other movies, the soundtrack is usually not memorable though they try as hard as they can. Here, they use a soundtrack that still contains the heavy epicness of a rock band, but yet it was still appropriate and didn't distract the viewer. EPIC WIN. And now.............let's talk about the visual symbolism.

Yes, I did that huge ... just so the paragraph was six lines. You notice there is a HE11 of a lot of dandelions in this movie. Well, here's my thinking. The dandelions on the grave stones of the people who would have died in this accident. Why dandelions and not daisies or sunflowers? Because dandelions are not usually recognized as a flower, more of as a weed. And that's how we look at people who we don't know in masses. Just people using up our resources, and if we die we pretend to care but our heats we really don't care. At least most of us. This movie is trying to send a message that the people who die in these kinds of disasters do have a life and family, and should be mourned and not just thought of as a way to decrease the population.

Now let's talk about the grave stones. They represent the people who have died in the accident. I sort of did that analysis backwards. Put the grave stones their first, as what happens during the event, and then the dandelions, which represent what happened afterwords. I still stand by the same analysis, just in the other order. And that's something that makes a movie memorable: more than one layer of meaning. There's a lot of movies that have only one layer of meaning out right now: Cop-Out, The Hangover, Alice in Wonderland (2010), Hot Tub Time Machine, that kind of stuff.

The actors they chose are not the pretty boy/girl or old man stereotypes that mos t people choose for casting. While Denzel Washington is in it, along with his apprentice I cannot remember the name of, the movie mostly contains characters that would actually seem to be in this situation, and not just their for sake of appealing to the masses. For the two main characters that do look like actors, they still have multiple layers of realistic drama that you can really relate to. This movie does practically everything right. Only one problem: it doesn't help explain how trains work to the audience. This is easily forgivable, but it rings of Robin Hood (2010) where the viewer has to do research prior to watching the movie.

That's a problem. Other then that, this movie is pretty much perfection. It's a quality film, one of the best of 2010. Along with The Expendables, Toy Story 3, Inception, and Scott Pilgrim vs. The World. Still, it rains as a movie that's better than most of those in many ways, but in other ways it doesn't quite take the cake. And remember, my ratings are a combination of actual general film quality as far as textbook, and my personal preference. All in all, this movie deserves a 5.5/5! Congratulations! You have Epicly Won!

I, Da Ca$hman singing off.

Skyline (2010)


The Strause Brothers? Remember that abomination called AVP2:R|UN-R[4.0BETA](2007) AKA Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem? 1.5/5? Yeah...I hated it. I hated so much that I hated it. I hated it so much that I hated it beyond hating all haters in the hating land of hate called hate. HAAAAAAAAAAAAATTTTTTTEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE!!!!! I FREAKING HATED AVP2!!!!!! HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah, that movie was The Strause Brothers' first position in an actual spot, and not just special effects. Sure, they had done TV Spots, but does that really count? All Commercials suck anyways! Yeah, some are classic, but they're just brainwashing. Now, you could see what was going through the heads of The Strause Brothers' heads during AVP:2. They had just done special effects and commercials, and that was their specialty AKA it was easy for them. Now they were being put up to directing a film, and they SERIOUSLY SLACKED ON IT. They were being inexperienced, and just flew with it. They also knew that $157 Million was guaranteed for another AVP film.

But with such negative reviews, it seems that The Strause Brothers' are now actually giving a $#!T. You can still see how inexperienced they are in this movie, but they've definitely grown much in the last three years. Now, the first thing they did good was the trailers...somewhat. The trailers show almost none of the film, only very little special effects and news reports that don't even make it into the film, which definitely draws the viewer in at no expense to the film. In some other trailers, they show the monster. But it's from a crazy angle, so you get a picture of the monster, but you don't fully understand it.

They do tell you that it's aliens invading earth, but they don't tell you exactly how they propose to kill us. They lean towards Stephen King's idea...but it's actually not that. I'll give you a hint: Zombies. That is ALL I am going to say. ZOMBIES. (And just to say, no the aliens aren't zombies.) The film is cliche, as you might have expected. But it does things with the cliches that you don't expect. First off, it's a huge tribute conspiracy. Wait, what you say? You wonder what conspiracy theory I speak of? Well, I said they thought of Freddy vs. Jason vs. Ash vs. Pinhead since the very beginning, NOW IT'S TIME FOR THE CLOVERFIELD CONSPIRACY!

Skyline has a lot of visual imagery to Cloverfield. The room the people stay in is very similar to the opening room in Cloverfield. The monsters look a lot like Clover. There's a painting of lines that resemble the ocean, and that's where Cloverfield (and Godzilla) came from. Cloverfield got it's idea from Godzilla, in which it's the people you focus on rather than the monster. Also, Cloverfield's parasites are very similar to the Alien parasites. Godzilla's original name, Gojira, is a combination of the Japanese words for Gorilla and Whale. Whale also means big, and sentence structure is reversed in Japanese. Therefore, Gojira literally translates to Big Gorilla. KING KONG!

Furthermore, Godzilla was based off The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms. Ishiro Honda thought of it after seeing The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms. The Beast From 20,000 Fathoms and Gojira were unofficially remade as GODZILLA, 1998. Cloverfiled was very similar to GODZILLA, and was rumored at first to be GODZILLA 2. Alien and Predator were made by the same company, thus making AVP decades later. AVP:R was the sequel, and was directed by The Strause Brothers. Skyline was directed by The Strause Brothers! See, I've already looped it, but there's more. AVP:2 was released a month before Cloverfield, suggesting more possibility of there being a connection between Cloverfield and Alien. 

King Kong and Godzilla have fought, which also helps connect loops. Alien seems to be a remake of It! The Terror From Beyond Space! It's being alone being chased by an Alien (which is kind of Metroid but it doesn't qualify.) It! Shares the same name as Stephen King's IT! IT! Features a list of Monsters like Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein, only instead of The Wolf Man, Dracula and Frankenstein, it's now Pennywise, The Mummy and The Werewolf. There was also an Abbott and Costello film with The Invisible Man. This is of course a sequel to the 1933 The Invisible Man.

And I'm still not done! The original book The Invisible Man was written by H.G. Wells. H.G. Wells also wrote War of the Worlds. Steven Spielberg directed and produced a version of War of the Worlds in 2005. Steven Spielberg will be producing a movie called Super 8. Super 8 will be directed by J.J. Abrams, THE DIRECTOR OF CLOVERFIELD!!!!! All these films are interlaced! And you could go farther with the movies that were in the same cannon! But then it would eventually get way too ridicoulus! I'm trying to show how these films loop. The 1976 Dracula probably doesn't loop with any of the other films by accident. 

You can see the whole diagram here, although it's done in Microsoft Paint.

Now that that's done, let's get back to the review. The film tries some experiments and is good in it's own right. It mixes a banana smoothie with a cheeseburger. The film both mixes Nightmarish quality (again, Alien.) (Probably did not get half of the diagram I could have, if I tried my hardest I could have proven that all films are interlaced together and not just by being films.) The film both mixes Nightmarish quality with blockbuster music. The events follow very close to Cloverfield, trying to keep you with the characters as their situation unfolds and no spoonfeeding. However it's countered with stuff you would hear in a Creators GODZILLA and 2012 movie, which does not mix well. But it's a good shot.

The special effects are FREAKING AMAZING. The sounds co-ordinate with them well, they're vibrant and fun to look at, very detailed, and all around cool to look at for Aliens. Some scenes are freaking disturbing, this is an actually scary film. Don't be subjected to "it's a Sci-Fi, it's cheesy." This film is extremely disturbing for all it can do without blood and screaming. It relies on the mind to make it scary, and some disturbing images put in your head. It's a very mental film. I say go watch it, I dare you.


I, Da Ca$hman signing off.

The Wrestler (2009)

It's over a year old, and my friend was seeing it. So, I decided to watch.

I feel my community is of the Nerd group, and this movie is definably partially an Academy Member movie. But let's take aside all the movie stereotypes we've learned all these years, and just remember which movies we love. I love to watch Sci-Fi, Horror, Action and Fantasy just like all of you. But after all the Die Hards, Friday the 13ths, Star Wars', Santa Claus Conquers the Martians', Cloverfields, Aliens, Predators, Clash of the Titans', do you really feel like it was a fulfilling experience? Not just entertaining, I mean an important part of your life. Something that actually changed you, even if the littlest part of you, for the better? When did AVP or Frankenstein Meets the Wolf Man change your perspective on life?

Still, you would argue that Friday the 13th and many other Nerd movies are absolutely beautiful. But still, those kinds of lessons add an impossible aspect of the story, making it virtually impossible to completely attach to those films. They're still beautiful, but nothing compared to movies like The Shawshank Redemption, Saving Private Ryan, and this movie, The Wrestler. As far as making you emotional and changing some of your thought processes anyways. And I'm not gonna be an @$$hole and say "this is one of the greatest movies I've ever seen in my life because it was just so darn well made and it made be cry and blaugh blaugh blaugh." My favorite movie is still Cloverfield, bottom line.

One reason why this still isn't my favorite movie is because it's scored on a different scale. Cloverfield gets an A++ in the hype, Science Fiction storytelling, scaring, style, writing and monster design. The Shawshank Redemption gets an A++ on writing, cinematography, emotions, story, directing and most importantly characters. So, let me stop lecturing you on the difference between a Drama and a Sci-Fi, and let's get down to this review of such a heartbreaking beautiful movie. Who here is a wrestling fan, not of today, but of the 80's and 90's? Or today, that's just as fine. Who remembers watching people destroy themselves, and you loved it?

Not so nice when you say it. And hey, I absolutely adore wrestling, especially from AWA, WCW and ECW, the three extremes. They literally sacrifice themselves, it's not even that the opponent sacrifices them, they sacrifice themselves, because they love you and you love them. Their lives fall apart because of the sport. But they do it anyways. People today, like John Cena, Randy Orton, they do it for the money. And honestly, a lot of legends did that too. Even after that, they can't leave the ring. It becomes their life. People will tell you that Wrestling drives you into doing drugs. Wrong. I'll tell you that wrestling makes you so in love that you'll do drugs for it. Wrestling is a very gruesome sport, but that doesn't mean it's "The Devil's Playground."

I'd describe it as "God's prison cell." (From a philosophical perspective.) And people will tell you how Wrestling works, and people will tell you how business works. But you haft to see the chaos to understand it. And this is just one wrestler, a fake one. Imagine the turmoil that people like Jeff Hardy, Mick Foley, Ric Flair, Bret Hart, dare I say Owen Hart, dare I say Chris Benoit, dare I say Mr. Perfect, dare I say Eddie Guerrero, dare I say Lex Luger, and Shawn Michaels had to go through, and are still going through in some cases. I've been a wrestling fan since I was 10. Okay? I love the sport, but D@M it ain't easy.

I've just lectured this whole review haven't I? I can tell you right now that if I were to say one thing specifically about the film, it would spoil everything. So I'll just give you the shadows. The writing is absolutely marvelous, beautiful. The directing is superb. The acting is 156.37% life like. The production value, for what kind of script it is, is absolutely awesome. The cinematography makes a 145.98 point difference. The soundtrack is absolutely beautiful. The atmosphere is fitting and beautiful. The only thing it lacks it the editing, it has a lot of jump cuts. But other than that, it's such a beautiful film. However, it is no "Ready to Rumble" more of "The Shawshank Redemption." Do NOT show little wrestling tykes or fans. 

The Rating? While it isn't one of my favorite films, going by the textbook, it deserves a 5.25/5

I, Da Ca$hman signing off.

The Wizard and the Ring from the Museum (2006-2010, Mystery Year)

An obscure film from BlazeTheMovieFan’s College.

Obviously not self-created soundtrack, Blaze starts out with an epic music only scene that helps us understand the atmosphere of both the character and the movie itself. The next scene, while cliché, and with an obvious sound of camera engine, is still entertaining and builds up excitement. The next scene also helps develop the plot, and while is still cliché, does not have that atmosphere and you are engaged. The wipe transition, however, feels unnecessary at first. However you understand the idea behind it when you see the window swiped open a few seconds later.

This scene at the police station, while again cliché (and keep in mind this was a college film), still doesn’t have that atmosphere of cliché and more or less has the atmosphere of developing characters and developing plot that helps the audience submerge into the world of this movie. About this time I noticed that the main character really didn’t have an introduction. Under normal circumstances this would be a bad decision. However the character has a personality that doesn’t need an introduction and we can relate to instantly, therefore not having an introduction saves time and money, and keeps the audience from yelling “BORING!”

In the next scene, we do have a little bit of shaky cam, zoom, and noises from moving the camera around. I do say this scene would have been done much better with a tri-Pod. The next wipe transition is a little much, however the next one after that does do a good job of giving the audience an impression of entering the Taco Bell without actually showing that scene, again saving time, money and boredom. In the scene after the wipe transition I just mentioned, I can hear a voice loud and clear that contributes nothing to the scene. This is an obvious sign of no microphone.

I’m a little surprised this college didn’t give Blaze a microphone, tri-pod or a better camera. The next wipe transition leads to a scene fast-forwarding the action. Yes, this saves the money and time, but increases the audience’s negative reaction due to the fact that we were not able to see the magician and the lady talk about magic and eventually have the magician convince her that she believes in magic. This shows a sign of laziness.

After watching many of Blaze’s videos, and being used to his very enthusiastic and very loud English speaking voice, I am surprised at Blaze’s soothing Icelandic speaking voice (if I got the language right.) It gives the character a whole new dimension from Blaze for American audiences, saying “this is Blaze’s face, but it is not his voice.” Of course, that is not literal, but that is how it feels for us dumb Americans. After the second discussion between the magician and the lady, there is a title card. A similar title card appeared at the beginning. I would suspect that Blaze’s editing software would allow for a better toned title card.

The one he has for the movie is like the ones he has for his videos. The one he should have is a black background and either a green and purple text. In the next scene, while there is background noise, it actually fits the atmosphere that the scene is going through quite well. The shaky cam I can do without, though. The dark wizard is…interesting. I expect a dark wizard, not a green wizard. However his introduction is at an angle that fits the mood for a dream like state.

Wow, that magic animation…I’m sorry but at college you can do better than that! This fight scene is funny.  The ending was begging for a twist ending. All in all, the movie is interesting and attention grabbing, not boring at all. However the ending lacks a lot of promise. 3.7/5

Signs (2002)

Painful to watch

Okay, I'm going to come out and say that I did something extremely stupid. I only watched about an hour of this movie when it runs for about 100 minutes. The reason? This movie was literally making me feel angry. I couldn't stand to watch this movie, it was like watching a good friend of yours do drugs except not on the same scale. This movie put me in a terrible mood, when I was having a wonderful day. So, I will only be reviewing the first hour, which from my sources is the worst of it. But if a movie makes you want to punch yourself within the first hour EITHER YOU'VE GOT SOME PROBLEMS OR THIS MOVIE ISN'T WORTH WATCHING! 

This film has gotten a 74% on Rotten Tomatoes, reducing to a 7.4/10 or a 3.7/5. This means that it is the best of popcorn entertainment, according to their opinion and my rating system.  I found this movie painful to watch. I was in a wonderful mood going into a movie that I thought I was going to love. This movie made me as angry as he11. Now let me explain something. This movie is both despicably conservative in saying “Gawd exists, all skeptics are the Devil!” And it’s also despicably liberal by saying “Aliens exist, all skeptics are rednecks!”

Here’s the thing: I don’t mind movies that have the tone “we believe aliens exist.” Almost all alien movies, Alien (1979), Predator (1987), The Day The Earth Stood Still (1951), And numerous Monsters vs. Aliens type movies (YES INCLUDING MONSTERS VS. ALIENS, GAH! I WAS REFERRING TO MORE LIKE GODZILLA VS. GIGAN!) But when a movie is hitting you with hate about you must believe in aliens or you are evil, rather than “hey, this movie has aliens, we believe aliens exist, but you don’t haft to believe to be able to suspend your disbelief, this is in an imaginary world with imaginary aliens!”

Now, believe me, I totally believe in Gawd and I totally believe in Aliens (whether or not they will invade I’m debating with myself about that.) This movie is Despicable. Now, let’s talk about other things. The acting is SO MUNDANE! It’s neither really crazy nor really sad, just mundane. It’s not realistic, Bad@$$, or anything else you can think of. Just mundane. Not even the cheesy synthetic stuff you get on Tuesday Night NXT. NO! It’s just SOOOO boring. That’s it! The atmosphere is pretty good, but is ruined because of the mundane feel.

If you wanna creepy movie, you better do better than JUST a creepy atmosphere. Have acting and plot execution that match the atmosphere and THEN you have made the formula for an atmospheric film. THIS IS AMATUER! M. Night Shyamalan did four huge films before then including The Sixth Sense (1999). He was NOT inexperienced! Everything else was very unnoticeable. The characters were way too cliché, and it’s not redeemable when the movie is only NINE YEARS OLD. The effects are iffy but forgivable for 2002.

This movie was made by Touchstone Pictuers, AKA Disney! Irony! They hired Mel Gibson!!! Ugh…This movie did contribute two lines that at least should be memes “there’s a monster outside my room can I have a glass of water?” And “I’m insane with anger!” All in all, this movie is despicable and something I don’t wanna spend much time on.2/5

I, Da Ca$hman singing off.

Contact (1997)

A hidden gem in the weird age that was the 1990's.


The 1990's are either regarded as the age of change or the age of crap. Music was turning from all-suits-all to everything going either extremely hard or extremely soft. Video Games were going from two dimensional to three dimensional. Domestic violence was becoming less and less apparent. The internet was becoming common place! Around the time this movie was made, DVD was beginning to take over VHS and Laserdisc. As well as movies becoming more and more like summer blockbusters, instead of intelligent art. As well as what was already summer blockbusters becoming more frequent. This was the time when GODZILLA (98) INDEPENDENCE DAY (96) STARGATE (94) and Battlefield Earth (2000), Batman & Robin (97) and Batman: Forever (92) were being made. (The three in caps are meant to be in caps, that's the official title.)

However this was also the time when Wes Craven's New Nightmare (94) Jurassic Park (93) The Lost World: Jurassic Park (97) Scream (96) and SIX REAL Godzilla films (91-99) were being made. Along with every Independence Day - The Video Game there was a Super Mario 64. Along with every Superman 64 there was a Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time. So I guess with every Buffy the Vampire Slayer, there was a hidden gem called Contact.

So why is this movie so great? Well, I can tell you that it's not boring at all. It's an extremely entertaining film, not once did I truly clock watch out of boredom. (Just out of hunger.) But it's not perfect. The back story helps, but really is just filler. Although they really didn't need filler, because it was TWO AND A HALF HOURS. It is long. However it goes by in what feels like an hour and 45 minutes. Kind of like the book Stephen King's IT, or House of the Scorpion. The plot is full of twists and turns that shock you out of your seat. It rings of cliche, but it totally isn't at all. It's a film that mixes a realistic approach at the plot and a fantastic approach at the plot, sort of trying to fuse the two factors, and there is a reason.

The acting is superb above and beyond. To me, they don't feel artificial. The actors feel like real people in a real situation, even though the character development is highly fantastical and movie type. Now, fore warned, this is not an extremely intense film except for the very end (I SWEAR I WASN'T ON ACID.) While it's very, very serious, it's not dark at all. It combines a light hearted story with tons of realistic drama and situations that perfectly portray the peril that man would be in if this really happened. However it also dives into another dimension to explore the possibility of aliens and supernatural beings, as to say "what is God?" And "Are we alone." As well as "are these two thoughts interlaced somehow?" And then "which way?"

That's something good a film does - asks questions that the movie helps tease towards an answer but still leaves it up to the human creativity. It means that the movie truly cares about the audience. It doesn't spoon feed it, but it doesn't completely hide at it. It leans towards a certain point just by a few degrees but still lets you try to figure it out for yourself based on the semi-fictional evidence the film gives you. No wonder this was based off a book, it has so much intelligence compared to other films. It also provides many puzzles and unanswered questions that don't lean towards any direction until they are solved, if it is solved. The film is an experience, and that is one reason why you don't feel bored. It's more than a story, it's sort of a mystery. But the answer is never given, because of the experience.

All in all, this film, while it has it's flaws, is a hidden gem. Superb acting, extremely well written story with lots of mystery and life defining questions, wonderful plot twists where you don't expect them, and special effects while not realistic are vibrant and beautiful. The rating? It deserves a 4.69/5

I, Da Ca$hman singing off.

The Fifth Element (1997)


This is probably one of the worst choices to watch if you have a cold. If not, it might be one of the best choices. First things first, Bruce Willis is in this film. And...he is kind of underused. Not to say he isn't used, he definably shoots up peoples. But he is more played as an understanding character who is sympathetic to the other protagonist, Li Luu, or as I like to call her, Multi-Pass. You'd understand if you watched the movie. So, in this review, we are going to refer to her as L.L. Multi-Pass. This film, believe it or not, is actually a French film. However, the cast, story and characters are unbelievably, even strictly Hollywood. Not Bull$#!T, thank God. *Shudders.*

It's the tone, visuals, costumes and use of the cast that is surprisingly different. It is really strange. One of the really bad things is that the whole film revolves around a McGuffin, or as I like to call it, a McMuffin. The McMuffin wouldn't be such a bad deal, since there is a much bigger force that is more important, if it weren't for the fact THAT WAS A BIGGER MCMUFFIN! First McMuffin: the thing that will destroy the other McMuffin. GAH! Not good! The story really revolves around John McClane/Bruce Willis and L.L. Multi-Pass' relationship that turns from parent to adopted child to a love interest. READ THAT SENTENCE AGAIN. The whole execution was very well, sure, but that fashion of falling in love is a little creepy. I should appreciate how it was portrayed, though.

Speaking of McMuffin's, because the whole plot revolves around two McMuffin's, it is really hard to follow. Even at some points, you might find yourself not being able to concentrate or understand the film, because it's very convoluted and a little pointless. I mean, the events they had to do are logically executed and are a logical plan for a 90's Sci-Fi film, and the event that happens if the big McMuffin is not destroyed is doomsday, sure. But it's really not explained to much, that's the problem. It's not a "that didn't need to happen" film. It's just a "how did that happen" film.

Other characters are memorably weird and somewhat awesome, but don't get quite enough screen time. If this movie was 15 minutes longer they would have all had adequate screen time. L.L. Multi-Pass is actually somewhat more Bad@$$ than Bruce Willis. Eh? Another character you should look forward to, is the fusion of Aelia Sakura and "James Cameroon's Dances With Wolves" Monkey-Cats. Or, as you would like to call them, Avatars. Except...BEFORE THEY EVER EXISTED ZOH MAH FAUKIN' GAWD!!!! All in all, this film is...weird to say the least. Check it out if you wanna see some abandoned Sci-Fi of the 90's. He11, do a double feature with Contact!

The Rating? 3.5/5. To make it sound better (cause nobody gonna angry da Nerds on dis website), that results in a 7/10. But I couldn't give it anymore then that. I like this film a lot, but it does have some flaws and because of that McMuffin, you know.

I, Da Ca$hman signing off.

Back to the Future Part III (1990)

The final part in one of the greatest trilogies of all time...can it live up to the last two masterpieces?

20th Anniversary of the film, and the film debuted on the 75th Anniversary of Universal. (And P.S., don't judge a book by it's cover.)

A lot of people hate the third one...the question is why? Are they wrong or right? And that's what we're gonna answer today. The beginning again is beautiful, but it doesn't really set the right mood. Except for the cliffhanger, that is correct. Once again, the humor and references are spot on. Mostly...you're gonna see me say that a lot during this review. One of my favorite jokes from this movie is "My horse broke down." Whether or not that is a correct sentence, I just can't stop laughing at how much Marty is unaware of the Old West, especially compared to Doc Brown. 

Once again this film tests the viewers knowledge of what just happened, but this time extremely, yet STILL towards an advantage to the films humor. Even if you don't get the reference, Dr. Brown sticking his head in the trough is still funny as he11. Especially where it's placed!...Wait what? Now, the first two films were completely original and innovative. This one...well since it is the Old West, it suffers, and sometimes necessarily suffers, from some major cliches. And by the way...WWE I think got some inspiration from BTTF 3. Think about it for just a second.

Most of the film is the awesomeness you'd expect from Back to the Future. So I don't understand why people hate the film...oh wait, yes I do. The third act (film buffs term for last scenes of the film) WERE JUST DONE SO SLOPPY! Now, give them credit, this was originally going to be a six hour film, so it's only natural they skimp on the ending. But that isn't an excuse for ending one of the greatest trilogies ever in such a cliche and stupid, stupid, STUPID, fashion. Yeah, I also understand it's a light hearted trilogy. Wait, NO I DON'T!*SPOILERS TO PAST EVENTS* Biff took over the world, Marty's mom tried to have $3X with his own son, people get dumped in crap OS MANY TIMES!

It is NOT a family trilogy. There's swearing, violence, even while it's all in clean fun, it's still more mature than people take it. So why didn't they do the dark ending and make the series much more powerful? Are we being serious here? No, I don't hate the film as a whole for it. But I can bet you a lot of people do. There's so many plot holes in the ending. That's one thing that Back to the Future lacked for most of the time - PLOT HOLES! THERE WERE NO PLOT HOLES IN THIS SERIES UNTIL THE LAST 1/3RD OF THE 3RD! That's a huge accomplishment, I just feel bad that the ending did it in badly. As Mr. Black would say, "the ending is the most important part of a film." This is no exception.

The Rating? The first two acts are extremely awesome with a new setting, which deserves the same as 2, 5.07/5. But that third act takes it down to 4.9/5. Yes, the worst of the series. But it's still an extremely awesome film.

I, Da Ca$hman singing off the Back to the Future marathon.

Back to the Future Part II (1989)

A sequel? It's...THE SAME MOVIE? Or is it both? Is it corporate greed? Or is it being realistic?

Now lemme quickly explain something: Back to the Future 1-3 were all filmed and meant to be released at the same time as one movie. But this would have added to approximately a 5 1/2 hour-6 hour film. So the intros to the movies seem like filler in 2 and 3, as well as their being reminders of what happened in the end of the last one being the last one ended on a cliffhanger. So, judging the 3 on their own, to me, is something unjust. But I will do it anyways, BECAUSE I KICK-@$$ FOR THE NERDS!!!

This movie starts off with, while filler, a beautiful scene in the clouds that sets the mood perfectly (though you won't recognize it at the beginning.) In the original, it leaned more toward comedy. While this film does that as well throughout 1/3rd of it, during the first 1/3rd it leans towards Science-Fiction, and in the middle 1/3rd it leans towards Apocalyptic dictatorship scenario. So the film stays flavorful throughout the entire experience successfully. It doesn't try to be a Sci-Fi Comedy, it tries to be an awesome movie. And that's what more movies should do (though it would make BTTF less of a gem...hmm...)

Somehow in that 1/3rd of Sci-Fi, they predicted a lot of things right. Nike is already preparing to release Self-Lacing Shoes by Fall 2015. XBOX 360 Kinect is the answer for "games that don't use hands." It also predicted skyscrapers being more flashy and giant TV's on the walls of skyscrapers making advertisements. (Though this is strictly to big places like New York and Tokyo.) Also they predicted Nostalgic 80's Restaurants (though that was a pretty easy guess.) They also predicted mechanical body parts, and with them being used for leisure.

To continue, they also predicted correctly Voice Commanded, Huge, HD and Multi-Channel Display Televisions. Jeez, did that Delorien actually work? Was this a documentary? Nah, we're just an extremely predictable species...OR ARE WE? Aside from my infinite conspiracy theory table, there is still a review to go on. In the first 1/3rd the characters are much more stereotyped, likely because we haven't been to 2015 as of yet (and neither with this film.) But the other 2/3rds, which are characters that are reprises, the characters are again four dimensional.

Like the first film, the plot is not obvious, you really don't expect all the twists and turns that are going to happen. Even if you do get a hunching suspicion, you still know that the logic in these movies could change those courses of action at any given time. Also like the first film, pay attention for hints at the first and third movie as well as the one your watching. The whole series is like a giant memory game, but not that it bugs you and affects the plot severely. By the time they get to the last 1/3rd, (first 3rd=2015, 2nd 3rd=1985, 3rd 3rd=1955,) the possibilities become endless, because they've traveled so much. This tells us that the film is not very lazy at all. It likes to run on all cylinders.

Biff, in all of his versions, remain a character you love to hate throughout the films. But in this one especially, you just HATE HIM, YET YOU LOVE TO HATE HIM. Which is why I mention him more thoroughly in this review. The Cliffhanger was great in the first one, but here it makes you HAFT to see the third one. Which is that corporate greed? No, it just looks like it. And to many people who have seen the third...it makes it look so even more.

The Rating? Yes, it is a better film than the first. But some spots of the film are not quite as good. So for that, I'm making it just slightly above the first, 5.07/5.

I, Da Ca$hman signing off.

The Color Purple (1985)

An All-Around Steven Spielberg Classic.

Beginning this movie right off the bat you notice how expertly crafted the cinematography is. It also continues to become even better as the film progresses. But more importantly right off the bat, the introduction to the plot DOES NOT pull any punches, it tells you just how disturbing the subject matter can be and will be. It doesn't let up either, throughout the film continuously the plot takes another disturbing turn after another. When something huge happens, you really feel that way, and it affects both the character and you. On the other hand, when there is a more lighthearted scene, it also makes you feel very emotional in that same path of emotion.

However, happy moments very often get interrupted, and when they do, you feel the characters' pain even more strongly. In a way, you wish they didn't happen, but only in the matter of suspension of disbelief. It certainly is an emotional film, very well executed. More on the sadder parts, the prejudice is very well executed and prevalent, unlike that one racist film that won so many awards...*cough*GONE WITH THE WIND D@M IT!*cough*. It really tries to show more like how it was back then, instead of lightening it up for the general audience. Of course, I wasn't around in 1909-1938, who do you know who is, but that's how I see the matter.

A specific scene, if I had to choose one, that shows the execution at it's finest is the shaving scene that happens early on in the movie. It is done so well, accompanied by the exact right music and events, that you are really able to feel the tension in the air so thick like Ceily. As for the music, it is a bit generic, but that doesn't really make too much of a bad string since it still is appropriate for the situations it accompanies and very well done overall, generic as it is, isn't a bad thing. Each scene in itself is unique, however staying with the mood of the film. Basically, every event has it's own fingerprint, so that it never becomes stale.

I wouldn't be the one to judge the acting, but if I could, I would say it is pretty D@M impressive. One of the few bad things about this film is that it can be a little hard to follow due to the difference of culture and time (Post-Civil War South and 1909-1938). The atmosphere and art direction - if you could call it that - is well crafted. What goes in the way of dialogue is very well crafted, and while very well done execution still has room for improvement. The movie has alright pacing, what feels like an hour is an hour. Only it is 2:32. If you can deal with the long running time due to what I guess is staying close to the book, then I wouldn't call it a flaw.

The characters are written well, very interesting and convincing. Another very minor complaint is the PH Balance of the film as far as being Artsy. It can be a little too artsy at times, but this again I didn't mind too much. Basically, this is one of those films where there should be a lot of disagreement. By the way, watch the atmosphere and art direction, I guarantee as the movie goes on and years pass, that it looks brighter and more hopeful. Speaking of which, the Color Purple is a huge symbol. Most of the movie goes without it, but trust me, it's an important factor in this film. 

Another scene I could pick out to talk about is the Dance Scene, which is tense, emotional and gripping. The film is able to deal with Racism and Sexism from 1900-1940 at the same time, both realistically and with guts. I mean, seriously, the execution and writing of this film is just magnificent. WHAT? You're telling me Spielberg didn't write this? At least he directed it, thank goodness. I would go to say that the directing is the biggest part out of the big three (production, writing, directing). Second is writing. The twist at the end, which I will not spoil, may seem abrupt but is heart-warming and faith increasing.

Is the pacing good however? We already covered my opinion, but the basic fact is they covered 28 Years and 2 Seasons in 2:32. According to some points of pacing, this would not be good. I tend to disagree, but I thought I may put that fact out there. Overall, this film is very emotional, disturbing yet heart-warming and faith increasing as these characters face some great realistic tribulations of the time. Art-Direction, Cinematography, Execution, Writing, it's all very well crafted. I wouldn't go as far as to say it's one of my favorites, but it's definably great. 4.9/5

I, Da Ca$hman signing off.

Spies Like Us (1985)

...D@M I've ran out of witty remarks.


Sorry I couldn't put the trailer in the review, the website is acting up again! Also to note, I have a cold, and I haven't been on the website in a while. But let's get on with it, shall we?

The movie's opening is solid, it doesn't require dialogue to be entertaining and powerful. One thing you might notice off the bat is the pop culture references. This is done in a good way two ways: 1. It isn't too often and 2. This is a freaking parody of James Bond, so whaddya expect? The pacing is genius many times in the movie, it is neither fast food nor is it broccoli. It is some really good slices of pizza. (Which might count as fast food but whatever.) The training was so excellently well done. Funny to the max. The idea of adults taking and studying for tests in this fashion is flipping ridiculous, however the filmmakers portray it in such a serious fashion, that when you finally figure out how ridiculous it is you laugh even harder.

The test taking scene, aside from what I just mentioned, is genius and well-balanced. Chevy Chase and Dan Aykroyd are great actors, possibly setting an example for many other comedic actors. The characters, while one is smarter than the other, both seem to be stupid. It's like Dumb and Dumber but GOOD. It's refreshing and awesome and leads to crazy situations. The jokes in this movie are on time and well executed, not to mention extremely funny, just look at  "we're Americans" joke. I've gotta emphasize it one more time - DA PACING IZ AWEXOME!!! One nit picky thing I have to say is that some of the Russians have American accents. Eh? The several events in the...climaX...are exciting and dark. The ending is also very clever.

All in all, I would nominate this movie for Comedy Silver. But somehow this has a 35% on Rotten Tomatoes? Ugh....what? This movie is awesome! 4/5!

Back to the Future Part 1 (1985)

Happy 25th Birthday BTTF!

The film starts out with a long yet entertaining shot of Dr. Browns Rube Goldberg machine, with many details to pay attention that foreshadow the plot details that affect the film majorly. The film follows this shot with a scene that masterfully builds suspense for the silliest reason, in which Marty prepares his guitar. While the finish of this film is not what we expected, for it is more in that it is silly as he11. We almost get a slap in the face saying "well whaddya expect, a WTF BOOM moment?" After Marty finds out that Dr. Browns clocks are 25 minutes slow, we are treated to a light hearted montage that tell us we're gonna have a fun time with this movie.

And boy does it deliver. The characters, first of all, are well developed FOUR dimensional characters that you can relate to from real life yet still add entertainment to the experience. (I say four because this movie deals with time travel.) Mr. Strickland (a direct inspiration for Buck Strickland of King of the Hill,) is the perfect @$$hole. There always seems to be that kind of person in life, whether or not you meet him early in your life as Marty did, making that character a lot more powerful instead of just having a generic ruler of the school/office. The judges in the audition scene are also something we've all come in contact with, the idiots who critique us for the wrong reason. But later we realize that it was us who made the fatal error, and we were expecting too much of them.

Ya know...this was released a few months after Better Off Dead. Which means...DADADAAAAAAAA...absolutely nothing! I can betch your @$$ this was not an inspiration of Better Off Dead, psh. So why'd I even add it you say? Because...Pancakes are delicious! Jennifer starts out as a wonderful girlfriend already, but *MINOR SPOILERS* she changes to even a hotter girlfriend, however she is a little more moody (still very friendly.) While * MINOR MOAR SPOILERS* the rest of the characters change for the better in the end. This confuses me...what was the message they were trying to say? Maybe it relates to Part II and Part III.

*MINOR SPOILERS OVER.* Don't assume that the McFly family are going to ruin the film at the beginning, soon you go to 1955 and all the characters continue to be awesome. But the beginning family is crap. I get it, *MINOR SPOILERS* he gets a way better family *MINOR SPOILERS OVER* but I don't get it. There continues to be amazing foreshadowing and teasing about past/future/present events both in the film and real life. Trust m, these are minor spoilers. If I were to tell you about the great little details, it would be long, but ruinfull. (If that's a word.) 

The humor is always on time and mostly clean, not to mention funny as He11. As well as the ending leaning towards a sequel, but not making you angry that they are having plans at making a sequel. The writing is absolutely spectacular, and the actors portray the characters and emotions perfectly (especially Dr. Emmet Brown, one could debate against Jennifer.) The greatest thing about this film is that IT'S FREAKING EXCITING! IT NEVER GETS BORING! Yeah, there's time for plot development, but even that's still entertaining. When you watch the film, you care about the characters 471.84%. The special effects are very vivid, especially if you have the Blu-Ray version. Also, this film (and it's sequels) foreshadow and mention other events in the series keeping the audience smart and not lazy. They test your ability to remember what just happened.

Everything about this film is pure genius, no real errors. It's a very effective film to every generation. In the masterpieces of cinema, or any movie really, there usually is leaning towards character development or action and less about keeping the movie overall enjoyable. To put it more academically, instead of leaning towards one part of the film to make it a master of the genre, it makes every single aspect of the film good and not 3 specific characteristics amazing. So it's not the greatest movie ever, but it's one of the funnest films ever. It knows that film is about entertainment at it's core, and while the core is only one part of film, it still is important and frankly lacks a bunch of pure parts. This film needed to be made, and it is FREAKING AWESOME! 5/5!

Better Off Dead (1985)

And now a public service message from I, Da Ca$hman: Do not let your grandparents spill acid, or let your brother put his arm in the microwave. Not to mention, if your grandmother/father does drop acid, don't let them hijack a school bus full of penguins. And, children, two dollars are the least of your worries.

Warning: Can be offensive to: Asian-Americans, African-Americans, Drug/Medicine Users/Abusers, Obese Male Teenagers, French, Paper Boys, Penguins, and people who were born after 1992, along with many other social groups. How much of the population of the U.S. does that take up? Now, with that aside, let's dive into the actual movie. This is a very distorted view, more specifically the view, of an average and socially awkward teenager's life. The view, being that this is how a socially awkward teenager views the world, which is pretty genius. However it does enforce those stereotypes to people who actually ARE awkward teenagers, and I know. That's all I'm allowed to say, I know.

Obey Weegee Destroy Malleoh. You see, teenagers have that subjective view. That's why this movie is so offensive, because it's a look into the mind of a teenager. It's not just your average teen movie. You know the line I referenced in the beginning? We have all made those kinds of excuses, but they're never that crazy. But a teen's mind will distort them to seem that insane. In addition, a teenager will usually distort personalities in their head. Like how the paper boy is chasing him absolutely everywhere? Do you really think 20 different paper boys chasing him in a Friday the 13th style was done just for Comedy? Yes, yes you do.

We've all been harassed by different people who want money, more adults then teens, but still that good amount. We imagine them like that, as people who just CHASE US EVERYWHERE!!! And this film exaggerates on that. One character I'm surprised didn't have any real exaggeration was Monique Junet, AKA The French Chick. She seemed perfectly normal, with a slight exaggeration for film purposes. Maybe because she was the love interest, and the sympathetic character. Possible exaggeration of "foreign girls are hot" but I don't really think that's the case.

Another character, while I'm sure is exaggeration, doesn't seem to be reasonable exaggeration. Dan Schneider (If I'm thinking about the right dude.) You know, The PhFat Kid!! He's...huh? I've always seen obese teens as the most sensitive and nice kids to girls, on average. Never have I exaggerated an obese teen as a "$3X Fiend" who puts his tentacles and testicles all over girls. Now, the boss of Pig Burgers. "Everybody wants some." While I can see how this is an exaggeration....I don't really think it's very different. The embarrassing clothes sure, but it's not so extreme. I dunno, I am a teen maybe I'm buying into the exaggeration. The parents...the parents. I think this might be where all the Middle, Malcolm, Modern Family and the M sit-coms shows got their parent stereotypes.

The supposed Drug user, who appears to be Lane's best friend, is totally exaggerated. You know that dude you totally thought was absolutely crazy and creative, you could have sworn he was on drugs? (Me, strait edge but seems like I'm on drugs.) Well, I'm pretty sure they've never told you they do the hardcore Cocaine/Meth stuffs, unless they were trying to get you to try some. One of my favorite moments is "This mountain is covered with snow!!! DO YOU KNOW HOW MUCH THIS MOUNTAIN IS WORTH?" In real life, they are just creative human beings. In our minds, they are high. In real life, they are high. One time you have to guarantee me is exaggerated, is the Math class.

This scene proves my point 249.56%. They laugh every time a math equation is solved? They applause and get excited for homework? They, could you say, love to work harder and harder? Yeah, there are people who love math. BUT THEY DON'T FIND IT VERY FUNNY. That is written in stone. People they're exaggerating-Soc-y Math Geeks. You know if you understand my scale of the personalities of teenagers and successful peoples. You always feel like there's those people that love math, and you wanna get as good grades as them, but you know you can't? Imagine having a whole class like that. That is what Lane is going through. Try to put yourself in his perspective. 

Actually, no that will damage your taste buds and you will not want to eat Hamster Jelly. It will still taste good, you just won't want to eat it. Now...this is the 80's. Before 1992 really, there was still no respect for other races besides white in America. Yeah, we didn't lynch 'em in 1985. But one thing, at least for me, sets the tone for the decade: BLACK. EXPLOITATION. FILMS. Look at what kind of exploitation is today? Homosexuality. Who's getting the most flack and is trying to get another American revolution? Homosexuals. And to any idiots reading this: NO MOTHER F'ERS, IT'S NOT THEIR CHOICE.

Plus, partial Latinos. So, with that said, let's touch the basketballs of what really was the exaggeration of a black, native American or Asian person in a teenagers mind in the 80's. With the African-American construction workers, it wasn't that they acted bad. They just had a stereotypical voice and talked about "dem white boyz." Does that not seem like an African-American stereotype? My case and point: "Why throw away a perfectly good white boy?" It wasn't that the African-Americans were racist...they were just...stereotyped. WAT ELSE? That's what teenage exaggerations are, STEREOTYPES. But this is 391.26% stereotypes.

Now, for the Asians of questionable ethnicity (or my forgetful mind). The line "one hasn't learned English, and the other learned it from *insert announcer that my forgetful mind cannot remember here.*" Yeah, it's racist. Teens were racist back in the day, and frankly still are. I've seen it. The idea behind it is the exaggeration "Asians cannot learn English." Very crude way of saying what a lot of us subconsciously believe, but come on! It ain't true, but so many of you have at least thought it and it stayed in your head in some weird beetle of a way. But, lettuce move on, because I have other stuff that is not so controversial to tell.

The little brother, who just over achieves beyond all perception...are you f'n kiddin' me? Even the most stupid and ignorant, or any other types you've put on your siblings, seem to us to succeed more than they deserve. If this isn't an exaggeration of it I dunno what is. In short, for the characters, Savage Steve Holland did great in creating the ultimate teenage exaggerations. And about Savage Steve Holland, I really hope my star actor doesn't make me not care about movies anymore if I ever become a director. And that's comin' up soon, with a little independent film called "Bad@$$." *Gets slapped in the face for really bad promotion.*

Look up the story. What else is good besides the characters, writing and directing? The acting is pretty good, there's definitely lots of emotion in it. Production value, on top is nothing. Under the hood, boom that was good stuff as far as production. The cinematography is off and on. In some scenes it's beautiful, in other scenes it's just 80's average cinematography. The comedy effect, while it is dumb and synthetic, is pretty gosh darn funny. The "chuckle, chuckle, I can relate to that" funny. Not the "HOLLY $#!T THAT WAS FUNNY" funny. 

That's what I gotta say about the 25 (th anniversary) old movie. The rating? The characters get an easy 5.2/5. But the rest of the movie is about 3.2/5. This averages to 4.2/5. Check it out.

I, Da Ca$hman signing off.

Mad Max (1979)


So this movie pretty much goes in with the attitude that you know everything at the beginning. This is fine for the specific target audience, but the target audience is too specific. When making a movie, you make sure that the entire audience of the type of movie you are creating can understand the film. For instance, you don’t make an Action movie only people who know the inside outs of biker gangs to enjoy, and that’s exactly what this does. You make an Action movie that Action fans can enjoy. If you wanna portray a message more meaningful than 99% of what comes out in film, MORE POWER TO YOU!

That doesn’t necessarily mean there doesn’t have to be any introduction to the characters and storyline. No, I’m not saying spoonfeed us information, but I think people have a bad definition of Spoonfeeding. It is okay to establish who a character is and what the storyline is earlier in the film instead of just assuming the audience will immediately understand and has a wealth of knowledge about the subject. When you go to watch a movie, you usually read a synopsis before watching one way or another.

A synopsis should tell you what kind of movie you’re in for. A synopsis really can’t tell you that you haft to know exactly what you need to know going in. It’s like trying to make a sequel before making the original, IT RARELY WORKS. If you want to make a movie that focuses on the message more than other things, then just make a sequel to the movie, and have the original lay the groundwork for the storyline. It’s not about being different, or not being mainstream. IT’S ABOUT MAKING FREAKING SENSE. There needs to be a foundation before making a building, or else it crumbles to the ground.

Now that I’m done ranting about the how the normal person, or even the most intelligent of movie fans, or even the most expertise of action and exploitation flicks, can’t understand any of the freaking events, let’s get down to the good. While I really couldn’t understand anything, and had to look up a more spoiling synopsis to understand it, I didn’t really need to understand it. The visual style, that gritty old-fashioned exploitation feel that was the 70’s and 80’s (sorta) is definitely present. The action is pretty dang good, when it is prevalent.

The dialogue is subtle but well done. Overall, this movie is probably amazing if you know how the subject matter works, but if you don’t understand things very well and expect an ACTUAL FOUNDATION AND LAYING GROUNDWORK, you won’t remember it in T-Minus 13 Hours (unless you just had a somewhat emotional debate with someone who dearly loves the film, then it may take T-Minus 3 Days.)

The Rating? I’ll give it two ratings. As how I enjoyed it, I give it an average 3/5. As for how I may expect it to be if I understood the material more, I would guess it would be a 4.5/5. So let’s average it to 3.75/5, shall we?

Close Encounters of the Third Kind (1977)

Why did I not wait a year and do a 40th anniversary? Ugh....



This is a film that puts you in a trance while being extremely intelligent at the same time. First off, it uses CGI the way it was meant to be back in the days of Star Wars, Tron, Star Trek, Close Encounters, E.T. and recently Tron: Legacy. That is, for - putting it bluntly - PRETTY LIGHTS!!!!! DAAAAH!!!! If you want to be realistic I say use a guy in a rubber suit. If you wanna be nostalgic use stop-motion. If you wanna be just ridiculous but not so ridiculous that you ruin the film, use puppets. So what is there for CGI? I say CGI should be used for an experience of “flashing lights” and “special effects” that is both masterful and beautiful although is not realistic. If you wanna put it crudely - EYE CANDY.

Avatar is an abuser of special effects! ARREST JAMES CAMEROON AND DUKE NUKEM! The characters typically have a lot of depth and emotion; however the character development isn’t shoved in your face. (You may end up referring to my Tron: Legacy review, however this movie is way more professional feeling.) The acting is on par with Jaws, I think, just adjusted for an alien film (half sarcasm, half rotflmao.) This film can be slow at points. Most movies will put you in at an early climax from the beginning to get pumped up, then have you calm down until the middle of the story, then get you pumped up again until the climax and end somewhat early.

This would be described as great pacing. While that style of pacing does keep the audience not bored, this movie, and Spielberg, take a different approach. Instead of having you at two half-false climaxes that are very exciting but not as exciting as you would like, this film starts at the very bottom of slowness (give or take time and pacing) at works its way up. Even if you feel like you’ve been sitting in front of the TV for three hours during the first hour, by the last half hour you are in such a mystical area and arena that time doesn’t even matter to you and you are in a land of only “space” (pun intended.) Everything is built up slowly, theory about aliens, Devil’s Tower, the Close Encounters, etc.

Which brings me to my next point. Why is this film called “Close Encounters of the Third Kind?” This film goes through all four Close Encounters - sighting, recording, contact and abduction. Why is it not just called Close Encounters? In fact, that is what most people will shorten the film to. I’ve heard the argument “it sounds cooler for the dumb audience.” While this is true and gives a dumb audience a reason to research what they are dealing with, why did they chose three? If this was their goal, to inform and sound cool, then use four! Does third strike a different nerve in the movie going experience? Maybe so, but I think it would have been more powerful if it was called the Fourth Kind.

This film even focuses on the fourth kind (and first kind) more than the third kind (and even more than the second kind.) The alien design, without giving anything away, I can tell you is very innovative yet conventional at the very same time. Again, this movie puts you in a trance the way people wish Nosferatu (1922) would! (And don’t worry, I love that movie, but people sometimes overrate it.) It is both intelligent and exciting while dreamlike and beautiful. So this stands by reason that the writing was absolute genius. It really takes a mastermind to be able to write something that is executed (by the same person) to the screen so well. And unlike Signs, this film does not shove aliens exist down your throat.

By that I mean “this film was done by a believer in aliens, and aliens turn out to be true in his vision. It is strictly his vision, and made for you to sit back and enjoy. Yes, skeptics are disproven, but this film is a film for entertainment and film contribution purposes.” In Signs, it’s simply “ALIENS EXIST YOU FREAKING SKEPTIC! GET OFF YOUR SCIENCE CHAIR AND ACCEPT THE TRUTH!” Spielberg beats Gibson all the way down to Alaska and back! Of course, by my previous point, the directing was also very well done. You may not notice it at first, but the editing/cinematography was absolutely stealer, especially considering THE FILM had to be edited FOR THE SOUNDTRACK. Williams made the music before Spielberg made the film.

Through this six paragraph review I think I’ve covered my point. What do I rate it? I admit, it’s not the masterpiece Jaws was. But it also takes many risks. I think this film deserves a good 4.82/5!

I, Da Ca$hman signing off.

Gamera vs. Monster X (1970)

The final movie in our 5/12 Gamera marathon!

Gawd I love Gamera, I wish I didn't haft to part with the good ol' Turtle. Maybe next year I'll have more movies and do a sequel marathon. But alas, 2010 is almost over, and our last marathon of the year is finally coming to a head. But anyways, let's review Gamera vs. Monster X! (AKA Gamera vs. Jiger AKA Gamera vs. The Devil AKA Gamera vs. Barugon Part 2.) After six films in the series (The Invincible, vs. Barugon, vs. Gyaos, vs. Virus, vs. Guillon), Gamera vs. Monster X continues the traditional theme song and musical score along with some new stuff that isn't quite that different but a little better then the soundtrack in Gamera vs. Guillon. 

The film also carries out the speculation of mystical objects and beings from Gamera vs. Guilon, EVEN THOUGH GAMERA IS A 200 MILLION YEAR OLD 126 FOOT TALL FIRE BREATHING TURTLE THAT SAVES CHILDREN!!!! Minor quibble. The point is that children sometimes are more open to ideas that society has just labeled fake then us grown. We need to listen to the innocent, because although they have less of a difference between reality and fantasy, they are still open to more ideas and if you keep that open imagination as you carry out your education through your entire life you can become one of the smartest people on the planet!

In other words, listen to movies about gigantic flying turtles, they will teach you how to become Albert Einstein. Jigar, the newest monster in the Gamera universe, is AWESOME! He looks like Barugon's Bad@$$ Grandpa, sounds like an extreme goat, and has powers unbelievable to mankind! (We will return to that point shortly.) Gamera's face has been altered to show age, being that this was supposed to be the last Gamera film (we will also return to that point shortly.) However, the plot hole here is that he is 200 MILLION YEARS OLD. How does he gain any age in five years?

The idea of a curse is portrayed very well in this film, just like in Gamera vs. Barugon, however the characters sometimes jump to conclusions without analyzing the entire situation first (although then it would be three hours.) The first time Gamera is handicapped, you can really feel for him, although you really don't feel much. You can understand how sad it is for him to be trapped, away from the children he loves so much. He cannot go, as he feels he is letting down so many kids, and possibly letting them die. As he is forced to operate on himself, you can only imagine what kind of pain Gamera must be going through.

But then you feel happy that he is freed and you are singing "GAHMEARAH!!!" Jigar's heat ray, which causes all organic materials to vanish, is more disturbing then any other monster powers yet in the Gamera series. This was later ripped off and perfected to a certain point in Godzilla vs. Hedorah. One weird thing is that there seem to be some shots and powers in this film that are quite perverted, probably not intentionally, i.e. Jigar's tale or the shot form Gamera's head when he is trapped. The monster fighting is usually awesome, but is sometimes more flash then substance. No matter what, though, there is still enough substance to keep you thrilled (I do wish I didn't have to constantly remind you that this was in a different culture and time.)

Now, this next one is a spoiler...but it's worth it. Read it. Gamera's near death symbolizes how mankind is it's own worst enemy, as we will try to create something peaceful and uniting (science vs. Xpo), that will end up stealing from places that we should never try to steal from (the island vs. rainforests), and will deliver a force that we will think we can stop but nothing will be able to stop it, and we will have created our own demise from something we don't even have the ability to imagine (Monster X vs. Global Warming vs. War.) You can tell this was supposed to be the last Gamera movie.

The idea of larvae infection, which is studied in this film, is very creepy. Going into Gamera is very surreal, however it is slightly interrupted by constant chatter between the minor drivers and the adult guides. All in all, this seems like it would have been an appropriate goodbye for Gamera, but they carried it into Gamera vs. Zigra, Gamera: Super Monster (which was a montage), Gamera: Guardian of the Universe (a reboot), Gamera 2: Attack of Legion, Gamera 3: Awakening of Iris and Gamera: The Brave. I want to see all of those and Gamera vs. Gyaos, maybe next year.

Final verdict on Gamera vs. Monster X? 4.6/5

I, Da Ca$hman singing off.

Attack of the Monsters (1969)

Now THIS is how you do a Gamera film.

A huge improvement on Destroy All Planets, and here's why. First off, you notice the narrator is very cool. He acts as if we were watching an IMAX movie, although in the 1960's. (LATE 1960's.) The first bad thing you notice is that they seemed to have replaced good dubbing for charismatic actors. However these are only charismatic for Gamera, and not something that stands out and tells you "YOU'RE WATCHING A FREAKING CLASSIC B1T*H GO WRITE A POSITIVE REVIEW!" They're just up to maybe Gamera vs. Barugon (War of the Monsters) level. However the dubbing is WAY worse, so in turn it turns out to be a negative trade-off, but only by say -3.6 (not stars, points.)

The plot very much represents the time, as they were fascinated with outer space due to the very close launch of man to the moon. It is cliche, however still very fascinating as we still talk about this stuff today. And that's another thing - these characters act as though one or groups of people actually would act in this sort of situation (mostly.) While sometimes annoying, they're about as annoying as real life people. Some people may see this as good or bad, being movies are meant to be an escape from real world, but I like it because it adds to the idea that these are real people in real danger and they need Gamera to save them. The plot also becomes better and better as the movie progresses along with the atmosphere.

The movie has the perfect mix of introduction - early climax - bulk - real climax and ending. And all are done very well. You might disagree with me, but keep in mind this movie is both different in time (60's, age of Marijuana) and culture (Japan, land of video games and  giant monsters.)...I just had a weird thought. The introduction introduces the characters well and sets up the plot, the early climax helps us to keep up with the story, the bulk is compelling but not too compelling, the real climax is epic, and the ending is heart warming yet at the same time heart wrenching.

Speaking of the real climax, the monster fights in this movie are awesome! (For 60's, anyway.) Although, it really should have been called Gamera, Guiron and Gyaos: G3: Giant Monster All Out Attack (wouldn't have been plagiarism since the real GMAOA was released in 2001, and the Gatorade promotion has only been around recently.) Remember that montage from Destroy All Planets I hated so much? Of course you do. But now I can tell you that there's one in Attack of the Monsters! Except this one is actually focused! It actually knows what it's doing. Though it doesn't really tell the origin story, the aliens are asking in what ways does Gamera save children (sort of) and the montage answers that by showing how Gamera has saved children in the 1st, 3rd and 4th film.

Almost to the end of our five Gamera movie marathon, I do have to ask - WHY THE F DOES GAMERA BLEED BLUE? PLEASE TELL ME! Terra strikes both fear and wonder into the most skeptical. *SPOILERS* the idea of having a planet that is on the opposite side of ours could very well explain how there are U.F.O.'s, being none of our planets could harvest life and the closest solar system is 5 million light years away. (Meaning it takes 5 million years for light to get their, which travels at an unbelievable speed.) Also, Terra provides a 1984 idea of our planet dying through Nazi like behavior and abuse to our planet and ecosystems. It's heart-wrenching how self-destructive they are.

*SPOILERS OVER!*  This movie successfully creates a universe that is completely separate from ours yet we feel as if we know these characters from the very moment we understand their story. They ARE Aliens, but they are also CHARACTERS at the same time. And because of this, we are totally able to synthesize with their society and how it works. You actually FEEL and CARE about the aliens, and not just the kids that are trying to escape. (You feel about the aliens.) I don't know if I can say this movie is a masterpiece, because it is aged and does have some plot holes, along with being cliche, but it is very much a classic.


I, Da Ca$hman singing off.

Destroy All Planets (1968)

INT. - DECEMBER 16TH 2010 - 10:00 A.M.

I, Da Ca$hman finishes War of the Monsters and then does a review. He then goes out to his car. He comes back to find Gamera vs. Gyaos has been stolen.

I, DA CA$HMAN: Shoot, I hope not to much important stuff happened in GVG.

 I, Da Ca$hman watches Destroy All Planets.

I, DA CA$HMAN: Wat did I miss?!?!?!

Okay, so your guessing it probably didn't go down like that. Basically, there's only been two releases of Gamera vs. Gyaos that is still available for purchase on a format that it at least as high as DVD. I do not have either release since one was released recently, the later part of this year. The other I should have but I don't. D@MMIT. But it would seem as if something wrong went down during or after Gamera vs. Gyaos, thus resulting in this. Now, I'm gonna tell you right off the bat I don't hate this movie. I think it's awesome. I am also going to not critique it on the level of your usual classic, because it's Japanese, it appeals to monster fans, it appeals to children, and it was made in 1968 (although Night of the Living Dead also came out that year.)

But War of the Monsters and Gamera the Invincible set a huge standard, showing that they are masterpieces of the Monster Movie genre. Taking a quick scan of Gamera vs. Gyaos on Rotten Tomatoes (which I should be referring to as Return of the Giant Monsters since I refer to Gamera vs. Virus as Destroy All Planets), it has no reviews, and has an average rating of 42%. Google-ing provided me with DVD reviews and only one movie review of Gamera vs. Gyaos, but it was at BadMovie.com AKA B-Movie.com, which pi$$ed me the he11 off.

So I have no freaking idea WTF happened in Gamera vs. Gyaos. So, in this review, I'm gonna pretend like it doesn't exist until I finally get my hands on it. Too bad, I hear it's one of the greats of the Gamera series. So let's go to Destroy All Planets. First off...why Destroy All Planets? Blatant rip-off of Destroy All Monsters. In Destroy All Monsters, the mission was actually to Destroy All Monsters (though King Kong, Giant Octopus, Giant Lizard, Matango, Dogora, Frankenstein, Gaira, Sanda, Ebirah, Maguma, Giant Condor, Kamecuras, Giant Plesiosaur and Mechani-Kong were missing.) In Destroy All Planets, the aliens want to colonize one planet, and that is the extent of outer spaceness. No planets get destroyed. But that's nitpicking.

What pretty much guarantees the movie's shamefulness is the writing. MY GAWD! In Gamera the Invincible, the dialogue was appropriate for the situation and the actions that took place actually represented a disaster. In War of the Monsters, same situation but amplified to make it a Hall o' Famer. Not Hall of Famer, Hall o' Famer. It doesn't deserve the F. (2009's Avatar would be an example of a Hallow Famer, and Money Pit would be an example of a Hallow Farmer.) So cheesy, so lazy, so stupid is the writing. The dialogue at least. The events are acceptable but cliche, however the premise is outstanding. Aliens take control of Gamera? How could you mess that up?

Well, they did. Sometimes the dialogue will reduce itself to the kids just shouting GAMERA for the most stupid and predictable reasons. Now, a plus of this movie is that the monsters designs are just epic. Keeping the original Gamera suit to a certain extent, a spaceship made of six wasp colored bulbs, those eyes on the aliens are creeping me out, and a giant squid with a Triple H like nose! Even to this point, Gamera's breath is still FIRE and not Radiation. Gamera actually got a 1UP on Godzilla! *Audience Booooos.* Okay, okay, that was too far. The fight scenes are very fun and awesome. What you would expect out of a Gamera film.

As far as a certain scene that totally destroys all planets - there is a scene where the aliens go into Gamera's memory to find his weakness. This is also meant to be a catch-you-up to those new of Gamera. However, instead of focusing on his origins, his weaknesses, his strengths, and his soul, they focus on past battles. This encourages the stereotype that monster movies are nothing but brawls and don't have any meaning. Of course this is the American version, but did they really add that whole...what was it, 20-40 minutes - in the American version alone? 

The actors try so freaking hard but they really don't care. They have bad material, it's a monster movie, etc. Plus, I can tell these guys are unexperienced. At least the aliens are intimidating. The special effects of the 60's cease to amaze me, while the stuff of today is old news. Translation: Gamera can pwn James Cameroon any day. There are numerous - AND I MEAN NUMEROUS - plot holes. Sure, there's always one in Gamera or two. But these are blatant. I mean, you’re gonna sacrifice the entire planet for TWO BOYS? Are we serious? Plus, *SPOILERS* why does the leader need lives? *SPOILERS OVER.* Why do they speak English even when they are not interacting with human beings? And how do they know Gamera’s name? That was given to him by the humans!

Interestingly enough this movie seems to have predicted cell phones, or more or less came up with the idea extremely early. While the government has had these technologies before, it still questions me how this happened. The huge use of stock footage is almost disgusting. The soundtrack is mundane and uncreative when it is not the cheesiest thing you have ever heard.

All in all, this is fun for a Cheesy B-Movie and monster brawl, along with an interesting premise, great special effects, and a cool title. But if you're expecting another great entry in the series compared to Gamera the Invincible and War of the Monsters, then you sir are sadly mistaken. I would give it 3/5, but it earns it's extra .3 for the brawls and special effects. 3.3/5

War of the Monsters (1966)

Disclaimer: I am watching the American versions of the Gamera movies.

Disclaimer: I was unable to find a trailer

One of the rare sequels that actually improves on the original film.

In the review of the original Gamera the Invincible, I talked a lot about how giant monster movies worked differently then what is “classic film.” And there are good reasons for that. It’s usually a foreign film, which means that the culture is different thus the movie suits the different culture. I also talked about how this is a movie from the 1960’s, and all cultures were different back in those days. So you haft to see the genius through the eyes of the culture in that time period.

The great thing about movies like Godzilla, King Kong and Gamera, is that they are able to do that as well as remain genius. That is when they are called “classics.” I don’t know why most people don’t understand this, but they seem not to. Gamera the Invincible did it’s job extremely well, however you can tell this was a low-budget film and they didn’t have the extra time and money to pour extreme genius into it. In War of the Monsters, from the revenue that Gamera the Invincible has, they create a sequel that is worthy of the term “successor.”

Let me explain. That’s what I’m here for. First off, the original movie had a heart-wrenching story into it about a boy and his affection for turtles, however this was only a side story and was not the main focus. While the Giant Monster formula still exists in War of the Monsters, the main plot is really focused around a heart-wrenching, heart-pounding story about a murderer who steals an opal, and to not spoil anything, brings a curse among Japan in a way that I will not spill.

In other words, it should earn both the Academy Award for writing, yet it still follows the Giant Monster formula to a certain extent. The movie also features two monsters. However it’s not like Gamera is the main focus, as it’s so tempting to do. You want your money maker to be the main focus, and the second monster to be the second most focused character. However this monster is what gives the movie it’s heart-wrenching plot, and so Gamera is focused only to the extent they need him which gives the movie an advantage of not cliché. In other words, you don’t say “I’VE SEEN THIS BEFORE!”

It’s fresh. Of course it does have clichés, but it’s a 60’s movie, all movies of old age have clichés simply for the fact that it is an older movie and thus the clichés in this movie are not as cliché and are more conventions. Now let’s talk about the moral. Basically, the moral – or more so the message  - is why are humans greedy, it causes so much disaster and grief. My personal take on why people are so greedy is for the fact that it’s all about survival. One part of survival is eating FOOD.

You know how we eat food? We collect food. You know how humans collect food? They buy it with money. You know how we collect money? That’s where it gets complicated. Our instincts tell us that the quicker we get our money – which in turn turns to food (and other necessities) – the more chances we have of surviving, because we only live so long (at least in the wild.) Reason will tell us different things, but instinct is something we’ve had for millions of years where reason is something we might have had for 30,000 years.

So what’s way to get rich quick? Jackpot. Finding something extremely valuable and minimal effort. *Cough*VGA’S!!!!!!!!!!*Cough.* That’s why we are greedy, it’s all about survival. We haven’t had enough time to let Reason tame instinct. Most likely we never will because of the fact that we’re speeding up the earth’s change from millions to hundreds of years, and evolution takes millions and millions of years. Humans, and all other species of animal, are greedy by instinct. This isn’t to say it’s bad; it’s just an immature way of thinking.

Now let’s talk about monster design. Japan seems to have a knack for making things on acid. I already talked about Gamera. Barugon is a giant lizard with a color similar to a white man with a tan, a giant horn on his nose, he has a T-Rex head, he has a giant tongue that’s lick stretched out bubble gum with a bulb on the end that shoots out extremely cold ice breath, and finally, this monster shoots rainbows. Run on sentence, I know. I would say they get an A+ on monster design, however it bares many resemblances to Baragon other than the name. I wouldn’t be surprised if it was a rip-off.

Surprisingly, despite the very different shapes of the monsters, they have some he11 of  quality monster brawls. I do say Short, but fast paced for a 60’s monster brawl. The special effects are very realistic, aside from the slowness of the monsters and some bad lighting, they look very realistic, especially for it’s time. Better and more fun to look at then most CGI that’s going around these days. The plot is clever, the storytelling takes it time to help develop the story but does not bore, it’s a very well made all-around film.

Here’s the best thing: you will be screaming at the TV screen. It really is an exciting film. Plenty of twists and turns, that maybe you could predict but are fun anyways, and the action is awesome. It’s so fun, yet so smart. You really feel and care about the characters and events. Extremely.

Overall, this movie is very fun, very smart, very cool, very well made and has some very good REASLISTIC special effects. It really had a lot of effort put into it. It’s – dare I say it – better then the original. 4.75/5

Gamerra The Invincible (1965)

45th anniversary of a giant turtle the size of Godzilla with fangs that shoots fire out of it's mouth, arms and legs, spins like a flying saucer and is the savor of children! BOOM now that's something.

Just so everybody know, this movie is also called Dai Kaiju Gammera, Dai Kaiju Gamera, Gammera Dai Kaiju, Gamera Dai Kaiju, Giant Monster Gamera, Giant Monster Gammera, Gammera Giant Monster and Gamera Giant Monster which all mean the same thing. It's also called Gamera the Invincible. It's all about M&M's peoples! Anywhosen, I was and am all about giant monsters for my whole life. You give me a Jet Jaguar ring tone and I should be able to instantly recognize it. Tell me a trivia question about King Kong or Godzilla and I will ring in with AWEZOMENESS!!!!

But as of late, I've been venturing off into the land of other films. I think you and me know that extremely well. And as a reviewer, with most movies I need to go in with a critiquing viewpoint. I made a tiny mistake of doing that for the first few scenes. And why? No matter what giant monster films are gonna be very different, what we call "cheesy." Here are a list of reasons: 1. In Japan, the culture is different, and film needs to suit their culture, just like our films need to suit our culture...and bunch of fat teenagers typing movie reviews on their computers. 2. With Japanese films, those who do not know Japanese need subtitles, and for most people if they wanna read they'll grab a book.

3. With American versions, it is chopped to an extent where they tried their best to improve it but got too self-aware. They failed, in other words. 4. With American versions, the dubbing is usually cheesy as my sandwich the other day, if not completely off. Fortunately with this movie it is pretty on. 5. The average audience *goes to kick every average American in a giant pit of death, then returns* expects CGI and is conditioned to think anything but CGI looks terrible, when they don't understand that being REALISTIC and PRACTICALis moar important then being modern.

Let's think about it this way: Kinect, Move and Wii. Motion Gaming. Are they awesome? Yes. Do I want them to take over the world of gaming? NO. Has CGI taken over the world of movies? Yes. Is it awesome? Let's think...it saves money, it CAN look like real life, it can bring the magic of 2-D animation into a 3-D movie without looking extremely cheesy (though 2-D and 3-D mix well with movies like Pete's Dragon.) Do I wish real special effects still existed? Why do you think I love giant monster movies. I also love having a controller, because that gives both skinny and large people an equal chance at gaming. Not to mention, it's not an improvement, just a fact. 

Motion Gaming is an innovation that is simply cutting the unfit gamers out of the business, and guess what that does? THAT MAKES YOU LOSE MONEY IN THE LONG TERM. These businesses can only think short term! What? I'm getting so off topic that I haven't actually talked about how I like the movie for five paragraphs? Ehem...ladies and gentlemen, we have encountered an error. Please stand by. *FIVE SECONDS LATER.* Many things work in this movie, and you start to realize that through the beginning. The intro is genius for this type of movie. It's no "in a land of danger, horror, and slavery there lived a man who was going to win an Oscar."

But it does it's job right. You understand what is going on, you TOTALLY get in the mood, and is completely appropriate. It's a "Space - The Final Frontier" just not nearly as iconic and in such an epic tone of voice. I just lost the game. Also, the scene where the two scientists debate about Gamera is such amazing writing, because they aren't over the top (IT'S A MOVIE HERE PEOPLES) nor are they mellow. They are great actors and great writers doing a great debate for the fact they are in this style of movie. They actually throw some pretty good verbal punches, for those who think I am just some nerd making stuff up.

I can't believe I'm saying this, but these movies have very little development (besides the little one and his family) yet all the characters you instantly love. That is the sing of true genius. You don't need character development, U JUICST NOAW. Obey Weegee Destroy Malleoh. Back to the scientific debate, it used great foreshadowing, talking about how Gamera is about as real as U.F.O.'s and are either real, when we find out Gamera IS A UFO! Nao dat iz genius! The child's connection to turtles is actually pretty beautiful. You can feel for the connection that the kid has, because we all know how it feels to haft to give up a pet.

THEN IT GETS EVEN WORSE! *Spoilers* When the turtle seems to have dies, the kid tells himself that the turtle was just scared. And the fact it was because of Gamera, who saved the kid, makes tons of emotions that run through your head all at once which is - guess what - GENIUS! Gamera is a remarkably emotion series of movies, at least the early ones (have not seen the new ones.)  But of course, a monster movie is not complete without cliches. It follows the entire formula, which you should all know by now. And of course, most people who are reading this review probably have seen tons of monster movies, so don't worry.

All in all, Gamera the Invincible is a genius film, even the American version, for a 60's monster movie. It is emotional, epic, fun, and a jackpot for lovers of monster movies. 4.4/5 

One more thing - as for the marathon, I will be doing Gamera vs. Barugon (War of the Monsters), Destroy All Planets, Attack of the Monsters (Gamera vs. Guiron), and Gamera vs. Monster X (Gamera vs. Jigar.) If I can get my hands on any other Gamera movies, I will. And I will try my best. But 2010 only has so long left in it.

I, Da Ca$hman singing off.