RSS Feed

Monthly Archives: March 2013

Beyond the Black Rainbow (2010): Logan’s Amble

Beyond the Black Rainbow (Panos Cosmatos, 2010)

 

photo credit: Dread Central

If you have clue one what’s going on in this poster before you actually see the movie, you’re way ahead of where I was…

Panos Cosmatos is George’s son, and if you remember nothing else about George P. Cosmatos, he’s the guy who directed the immortal Tombstone. Which gives his kid some purt’big shoes to fill. (Unless you remember that George P. was also responsible for some of the eighties’ most brainless action pictures, culminating in the godawful—but ridiculously watchable—Stallone vehicle Cobra.) I’d like to say that Panos’ first feature, Beyond the Black Rainbow, does it. But, well…

 

photo credit: Bloody Disgusting

“You’re free to leave whenever you like. But the rest of the world doesn’t have chairs NEARLY as cool as the one you’re sitting in right now.”

Plot: we start off with a TV ad for Arboria, a Utopia-style community founded in the sixties by New Age-y guru Mercurio Arboria (Earthquake!‘s Scott Hylands). Fast-forward a couple of decades, and, well, Arboria is almost deserted. In fact, as far as we can tell, its only inhabitants are Arboria, now in his dotage; Barry Nyle (The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford‘s Michael Rogers), who rules the place with an iron fist, and his mother Rosemary (The Exorcism of Emily Rose‘s Marilyn Norry); Barry’s assistant Margo (Mermaid‘s Rondel Reynoldson—I’m assuming Cosmatos’ direction to make-up artist Kyla Rose Tremblay was “make her look as much like a high school lunch lady as possible”); and Elena (The Big Year‘s Eva Allan), a teen about whom we know absolutely nothing throughout the film; while Barry tells her bits about herself, specifically about her parentage, we find out very quickly that Barry is, to put it mildly, the most unreliable of narrators.

photo credit: Rotten Tomatoes

“Look who’s crawling up my wall…black and hairy, very small…”

 

You may contend that what’s in that last paragraph isn’t a plot at all, and I’m not going to argue. A plot does eventually appear—in the last seventeen minutes of the film—and Netflix, in their infinite wisdom, chose to highlight that seventeen minutes in its description, which sets up some pretty unreasonable expectations on the part of the viewer. I don’t think Cosmatos, who also wrote the script, was in any way interested in plot, though. I think he was interested in creating a nostalgia piece, an homage to early-seventies sci-fi-psychedelia flicks like THX-1138 and Solyaris, both of which are clear influences on the look, feel, and especially sound of Beyond the Black Rainbow. It’s a very, very beautiful movie, full of bold colors and that sort-of futurist look that seventies sci-fi movies figured the world would have by 1983 (I’m not entirely sure the movie is set specifically in 1983, but the two pieces of recognizable music on the soundtrack, Venom’s “Angel Dust” and SSQ’s “Anonymous”, which plays over the end titles, were both released in 1983, if memory serves [discounting Venom’s early “Angel Dust” demo, which didn’t see the light of day until the nineties]). In this aspect, the movie is simply pitch-perfect. It is an absolutely lovely nostalgia trip for anyone who grew up on that stuff.

But—and this is a big, big “but”—that plotline does creep in at the end, and when the viewer examines that aspect of the film, Cosmatos fails. Miserably. We get seventeen minutes of actual action, and oh my sheep-shearing, the incredible potential contained within those seventeen minutes!—and then the movie just ends. (Hearing SSQ on a movie soundtrack for the first time since, IIRC, 1985 assuaged my frustration, but not nearly enough.) That second bit could have, and should have, easily been as long as the first. The movie would have stretched to Bollywod-length, but who cares? Cosmatos throws us the bones of what could have been a really solid action thriller, and then does nothing with them. I think I actually yelled at the screen when the end credits started rolling, after that admittedly beautiful final shot that tied up no loose ends at all.

It is a film that is well worth watching, but be prepared for endless frustration. ** ½ 

 

Official trailer.

Needles and Sins (2007): Carry Out My Sentence, I Get What I Deserve

John Everson, Needles and Sins (Necro Publications, 2007)

photo credit: tower.com

“Suction please, nurse.”

You’ve read the reviews. You may have even already read Charlee Jacob’s intro. You don’t need me to tell you that Needles and Sins is a barnburner, the kind of book of horror shorts that will keep you up at night munching on chips and finishing just one more story the same way EverCrack had you finishing just one more quest. So what am I going to do different? Everyone else is focusing on the horror stories here. And they’re good, though I’m not quite sure some of them are all they’re cracked up to be (“Mutilation Street”, in particular, which Jacob singles out in her intro, strikes me as a gimmicky one-trick pony that could have been so much more than it is). I’m going to focus on the two non-horror stories here, which are, perhaps not coincidentally, the two stories that kick this book up from being good to being in the realm of Greg Gifune good and Vincent Sakowski good and Thomas Ligotti good and Richard-Christian-Matheson-when-he-wrote-“Red” good.

Read the rest of this entry

Devil in the Flesh (1998): The Bad Seed Grows Older (If Not Up)

Devil in the Flesh (Steven Cohen, 1998)

 

photo credit: Wikipedia

“I was young! I needed the money!”

The whole “erotic thriller” thing is a movie that manages about one pearl for every thousand swine. Not that it stops studios from pumping them out like M&Ms. The late nineties were an especially fertile breeding ground for the erotic thriller, and pretty much all of them were awful. Case in point: Devil in the Flesh, which has as its only selling point these days a nubile Rose McGowan looking quite delectable. Too bad the rest of the movie doesn’t measure up.

photo credit: stomptokyo.com

“You think this is good, you should see me with a four-wood!”

Plot: after some nastiness at her old school, Debbie Strand (McGowan, recently of the Conan the Barbarian remake) is sent by the state’s foster care system to live with her grandmother (Imitation of Life‘s Peg Shirley). No sweat, she thinks, until she finds out the grandmother is a crazy religious nut who expects Debbie to be her personal slave girl. Worse, she’s also got a couple of detectives (Wag the Dog‘s Phil Morris and Gigli‘s Robert Silver) nosing around trying to figure out what happened at her former school. All that fades into the background, though, when she sets eyes on hunky Peter Rinaldi (Conspiracy Theory‘s Alex McArthur), an English teacher at her new school. Debbie sets her sights on Peter, and god help anyone who gets in her way…

photo credit: histoiredelisbonne.blogspot.com

“Yeah, but wait till you see how I peel it!”

To put it simply: this is ridiculous. The script tries to marry horror story with teen sex comedy and does neither with any competence. The acting is baseline, but barely that; given the talent assembled for this movie, I have to give director Steve Cohen grudging respect for being enough of a director to get this entire cast to act this badly. And the erotic aspects of the script are… well, nonexistent would be the best way to describe them.

Unless you’re a huge fan of someone who was involved in this production (I watched it solely because of Wendy Robie, who was in it for far too little time), you should not only pass it up, but flee screaming in terror. *

 

WARNING: this is not an official trailer, and it contains major spoilers. But it’s the trailer that SHOULD have been, starting right about the title card that says “a flaming shit-pile of a film.” Truer words, etc.

Monsters (2010): Down Mexico Way

Monsters (Gareth Edwards, 2010)

 

photo credit: notanotherscreenwritingblog.blogspot.com

Do-o-o-o-o-own in Ju-u-u-u-u-ungle…laaaaaaaaaaaaaaand!

The BAFTA-nominated Monsters is a very, very good film that a lot of people didn’t seem to get. There’s a lot of venom directed at this movie on the IMDB boards. A lot of folks are passing it off as mismarketing, but having read between the lines here, I’m going to advance a little hypothesis: many, many people went into this movie expecting a ripoff of District 9. It is nothing of the sort, and they are therefore displeased. Don’t be that guy.

photo credit: notjustnewmovies.com

Do you think perhaps Edwards was making a comment on the proposed US-Mexico border wall here? Naaaaaah…

Plot: six years ago, a probe returning from Jupiter’s moon Europa crash-landed in Mexico. It was not alone. Fast-forward to the present, and aliens have turned northern Mexico, previously a desert wasteland, into a steamy tropical jungle where humans don’t go if they value their lives, for the most part—not only because the area is inhabited by aliens, but because the American and Mexican governments have been waging war on them the entire time. Through a long series of misadventures (which is not at all wasted, as it sets up the character dynamics for the rest of the film), photojournalist Andrew Kaulder (Argo‘s Scoot McNairy), who’s been hired to chaperone heiress/tourist Samantha Wynden (All the Boys Love Mandy Lane‘s Whitney Able), finds himself having to cross the infected zone to get her back to America.

photo credit: bigfanboy.com

“I dunno WHAT it is… but I’m gonna shoot at it!”

All of which should tell you that what you’re looking at is a road movie (with a romance subplot) that happens to contain monsters, not that the monsters are the center of the action as they were in District 9. If it helps, think of it more as a zombie movie; it’s structured more like one than it is a traditional monster movie, in that it focuses more on the humans and their interaction than it does on the external bad guys. (Though I haven’t yet found a way to use the aliens as a parallel to consumerism. If anything, they’re the opposite—they’re actually improving the world through terraforming.) One way or the other, however, it is very much above the average flick, and very much worth seeing if you get a chance. *** ½

 

Trailer!

Dread Father (2013): From the Depths of the Black Marsh

Mehrunes Dagon, Dread Father (self-released/bandcamp, 2013)

photo credit: bandcamp

All the Dread Magnificence of Bloodgrass…

Dread Father can be had for free at bandcamp; it’s a name-your-price download. But you know what? I paid for it anyway, though I paid a pittance (and I feel bad about how little I gave ’em, to be honest). Why? Because they deserve more for this incredible little five-song EP.

The easy way out would be to tag Mehrunes Dagon (for those not up on your role-playing geekery, Mehrunes Dagon is the name of one of the daedra (demonic) princes in the Elder Scrolls series of CRPGs) as stoner metal; they definitely wear their Clutch- and Kyuss-loving hearts on their sleeves throughout most of this demo. But “Mysterium Xarxes,” the initial track, reminds me a lot of Maurce de Jong’s various projects (especially Aderlating); it’s much more keyboardy and dark-ambient, with a long sample from Anton LaVey’s infamous 1968 album The Satanic Mass running through it (a fun little twist, as Mysterium Xarxes is the name of Mehrunes Dagon’s holy book in the Elder Scrolls games, while LaVey, in the sample, is reading from The Satanic Bible). Meanwhile, the center track, “Deadlands”, has the kind of psychedelic hard-rock/throwback bent that puts me in mind of Ghost (now Ghost B.C.)’s Opus Eponymous album from a couple of years ago. This is not a one-dimensional piece of work at all, and that is much to its creators’ credit.

If you’re a fan of stoner metal, this is a no-brainer, but others would not be doing themselves a disservice checking this out, either; you can stream the entire thing free while deciding whether or not you want to download. (Note for the easily-offended: as should be obvious from the above, this is overtly and unapologetically Satanic, so if you have a problem with that, pass it by.)

 

Because I couldn’t resist: a let’s-play video from The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim that shows how to get to the Shrine of Mehrunes Dagon (which is almost bloody impossible in Skyrim unless you know exactly where you’re going, and that damn Clairvoyance spell doesn’t help one bit) and what you have to do to score Mehrune’s Razor, which despite being kinda nerfed in the last two games is still one of the most powerful artifact daggers you can wield. ([font=”cranky old man”]But in my day, sonny, back in Morrowind… now THAT was a dagger…[/font])

Mila 2.0 (2013): The Worst Spoilers Are Those on the Book Jacket

Debra Driza, Mila 2.0 (Katherine Tegen Books, 2013)

Full disclosure: this book was provided to me free of charge by Amazon Vine.

 

photo credit: deadline.com

Though I have to admit it’s a cool cover.

The biggest problem I have with Mila 2.0 has not thing one to do with the manuscript that Debra Driza turned in, and for that I am heartily sorry. You see, Driza spends the first circa 100 pages of Mila 2.0 trying to keep secret what thoughtless copywriters and marketing agents—not to mention more than one reviewer—trumpet on the book jacket, in its ad campaign, etc., which by default makes it no longer a spoiler that our titular heroine is, shall we say—not to be spoily myself in case you have somehow managed to miss all that—not exactly what she seems to be.

(non-spoilery) Plot: Mila and her mother Nicole have recently relocated to Nowhere, Minnesota, to regroup after a house fire in Philadelphia claimed the life of Mila’s father. Mila hasn’t taken it well, not just for the obvious reasons, but, well, city-kid-in-the-country syndrome is in full swing. Sure, Kaylee, one of the popular girls, has taken Mila under her wing, even if her sarcastic-bitch best friend keeps prophesying doom on that relationship, and not long after Mila appears, here’s Hunter, an ultra-hunky transfer student from California. Kaylee sets her sights immediately, but Hunter seems to only have eves for Mila, creating a triangle that culminates in the car accident that sets up the remainder of the book—which is where I’ll stop, though you can pick up after that by simply reading the jacket copy, because that car accident reveals the major spoiler emblazoned all over same.

Simply-put: it’s a genre sci-fi-thriller, and as long as you’re okay with the predictability that brings along with it, you’ll find this as enjoyable a ride as I did. The criticisms I’ve read of the book in other reviews all hold water—most of the minor characters are one-dimensional, and some of the majors aren’t much better yet (but I’m assuming they’ll be fleshed out in later volumes, so am not counting off for that at all), the plot never goes anywhere an astute reader wouldn’t expect it to, etc.—but I’m okay with all that. This is meant to be a quick, fun read, and it delivers. ***

The King in Yellow (1895): If I Had Not Caught a Glimpse of the Opening Words in the Second Act I Should Never Have Finished It…

Robert W. Chambers, The King in Yellow (Project Gutenberg, 1895)

 

photo credit: Adventures in Nerdliness

…but as I stooped to pick it up my eyes became riveted to the open page.

The King in Yellow is best-remembered these days for being one of the seminal works behind the formation of the style of H. P. Lovecraft. Well, part of it, anyway (more on that later); as such, it’s must-reading for Lovecraft fans, and its current public-domain status means it can be had for free from Gutenberg, not to mention the many, many companies who take Gutenberg tracts and repackage them (usually also for free, but be wary of paying for a Gutenberg file!) to circulate at Amazon, B&N, and other web outlets. Hey, free is a wonderful thing. And the unprepared Lovecraftian may appreciate that, given the dual nature of the book.

The King in Yellow is divided into two sections. The first is the one the shallower Lovecraft fans are going to want to read, a series of loosely-connected (sometimes very loosely-connected) stories centering around the titular tome, the first part of which, we are told, is deadly dull, but the second part of which is capable of either driving people mad or gifting them with unimaginable power. (Or, possibly, both.) At least, most of them are; the first clue you’ll find that the thing is not a thematic whole is “The Demoiselle d’Ys”, a (this is a minor spoiler, but only a minor one; most modern readers will pick up on it immediately, though readers in 1895 may not have) parallel-time story that has nothing at all to do with The King in Yellow. Then comes the second half of the book, which is entirely different. It, too, is a series of loosely-connected vignettes, this one concerning an artists’ enclave in Paris. The stories are much more realistic, slice-of-life pieces about young passion, artistry, and war (one might argue that Chambers—almost supernaturally, if one believes in that sort of thing…presaged the devastation of Paris twenty years later in “The Street of the First Shell”). There is a minor connection between the two parts, in that the protagonists of most of these stories are artists of some form or another, but one would do well to simply consider them separate cycles brought together for the purposes of coming up with a full-length, publishable manuscript.

This is not to say the Paris cycle is in any way inferior to the King in Yellow stories. In fact, as much as I liked those, and would be thrilled to find myself a package cruise that would swing by Carcosa and Lake Hastur, I have to say I ended up liking the Paris cycle better; perhaps because Chambers was striving for more realistic tales, his characters are somewhat better-drawn, and (oddly; one would think this true of the supernatural characters) quirkier, more individual. They sometimes do irrational things, but at no point does one equate “irrational” with “out of character”, and that’s a lesson any number of writers would do well to learn. This is good stuff indeed, and stands equal to any number of solid short story collections published since. Check it out (for free!). *** ½

 

It seems there is also a free audiobook version, and you can find it in two parts on Youtube!

The Hole (2009): Don’t Go in Joe Dante’s Basement

The Hole (Joe Dante, 2009)

 

photo credit: Dread Central

We created it, let’s take it over.

If you’re going to make an homage to the young-adult horror films of the eighties, who better to do it than one of the original directors? Joe Dante, whose resume in the horror world was built first on cheap exploitation flicks (Piranha) and then on blockbuster teen horror (Gremlins), returns to the world he helped build, and a welcome return it is indeed. The Hole could easily have been made in 1989 rather than 2009, and I say this with a great deal of affection. This is a fun, fun movie, though perhaps Dante cleaved a little too closely to the formula (more on this later).

 

photo credit: Sergio Leone and the Infield Fly Rule

Such an overused shot…but still so effective.

Plot: A city-bred family—mom (Beyond Borders‘ Teri Polo) and her two sons, older Dane (The Vampire’s Assistant‘s Chris Massoglia) and younger Lucas (The Dark Knight‘s Nathan Gamble)—move to a little piece of suburbia. While the kids are messing around in the basement, they discover a many-padlocked trapdoor, and when they open it (as, of course, they must), they discover that there seems to be a bottomless pit in their house. With the assistance of their next-door neighbor, beautiful Julie (The Haunting of Molly Hartley‘s Haley Bennett), they track down the house’s former owner, known only as Creepy Carl (Tattoo‘s Brice Dern), and find out that the hole is a portal to a dimension that forces people to face their deepest fears. While Dane professes to not be scared of anything, both Lucas and Julie soon find themselves haunted…

Everything I love about this movie I summed up in the first paragraph—it feels like those safe, easy teen “horror” movies my entire generation grew up on. We loved Gremlins just as much as we loved Phantasm (or, for that matter, Piranha), and that was okay; the world of PG horror films in the eighties was vastly different than it is today, when a PG-13 rating on a horror film dooms it to mediocrity before it’s even released. Hell, this is the first PG-13 horror film in the last twenty years I remember actually liking.

Spoiler Alert!

SPOILER ALERT: the following paragraph can be construed to contain a major spoiler. If you haven’t seen the movie and are intending to, stop reading now.

photo credit: Bloody Disgusting

Warning: every scene containing this guy will give you nightmares.

 

The one thing about those YA-horror blockbusters that did always grate on me, though, was that very safety. You knew going in that everything was going to be okay; they were the celluloid equivalent of romance novels. The heroine was always going to wind up with the guy who was best for her by the last page of the novel, and they would live happily ever after. And, well, if you want to consider it a spoiler alert you can: Dante went right along with the formula. Didn’t deviate from it one iota. You would think that would kick the nostalgia bells into high gear, but given the movie’s lukewarm reception (as I write this, its IMDB rating is 5.8, audience rating is 48% on RT, though critical reception was much better [78%]), that doesn’t seem to be the case. It would have been great to see Dante suddenly turn on his heel and break new ground like he did in the early eighties… unfortunately, though, no dice, and in my estimation, the movie suffers for it—and I don’t seem to be alone in that. Still, I did find it an enjoyable experience. As with a few other movies I’ve seen recently, you may need to be of a certain age to get the most out of this flick, but it’s a fun ride if you grew up on Joe Dante movies in the eighties. ***

 

Gotcha some trailer right there.

Super 8 (2011): Alienachronisms

Super 8 (J. J. Abrams, 2011)

 

photo credit: Dread Central

J. J. Abrams not shooting on handheld? Perish the thought!

I’m having some problems figuring out what to say about Super 8, which I watched yesterday and enjoyed a great deal. I think much of the reason for this is that I’m not exactly sure what type of movie it is. On the other hand, it knows exactly what type of movie it is, which leads me to an inversion of my usual problem reviewing certain films. It’s part monster movie, following closely on Abrams’ success with Cloverfield. It’s part homage to 1979, an historical piece that aims to capture an era (and does so almost perfectly as far as the atmosphere goes, and I say this as someone who was just a year or so younger than the principals in the film in 1979). It’s part coming-of-age rom-com, and this is probably the movie’s strongest facet, as it takes a well-worn plotline, social outcast 1 ropes hot girl into working with his crew in order to seduce her, opening the way for social outcast 2 and hot girl into falling in love, destroying his plan—and gives it new feet. And somehow, despite any number of anachronisms that don’t make sense in a movie that supposedly takes place in 1979, Abrams makes it all work.

 

 

photo credit: blogs.orlandosentinel.com

The best-laid plans of mice and fat kids like me…

Plot: in a small town in Ohio, a bunch of teenaged kids are trying to make a zombie movie. Director Charles Kaznyk (Riley Griffiths in his screen debut) has a major crush on school hottie Alice Dainard (Because of Winn-Dixie‘s Elle Fanning), and so reworks the script to give his lead actor, Martin (Alabama Moon‘s Gabriel Basso), a wife, and asks Alice to be in the film; she agrees. Of course, the entire cast and crew of the movie are equally hot for Alice, including make-up artist and model-builder Joe Lamb (The Between‘s Joel Courtney), the son of a local deputy. Unfortunately, Joe’s father has an unpleasant history with Alice’s father Louis (ER‘s Ron Eldard), which complicates things when the two find themselves getting entangled. While the crew are shooting a pivotal scene at the local train station, they witness—and unintentionally film—a truck, driven by local biology teacher Dr. Woodward (John Dies at the End‘s Glynn Turman), driving onto the tracks and into the path of an oncoming train, causing the worst derailment in Ohio history. When the authorities arrive to clean it up, they turn out to be military types, led by sadistic tinpot dictator Nelec (Warrior‘s Noah Emmerich), who immediately crosses paths, and hackles, with Deputy Lamb, who is elevated to acting Sheriff when his boss, Sheriff Pruitt (Edward Scissorhands‘ Brett Rice), disappears under mysterious circumstances.

Honestly, this is just the tip of the iceberg. Much has been made of the fact that this is not only a love letter to 1979, but is also a love letter to a number of eighties films (notably E.T. and The Goonies), as well as closely mirroring Abrams’ own Cloverfield. This is true. And if that bothers you, so be it. I didn’t have a problem with it at all; better an homage than yet another Hollywood remake, as far as I’m concerned. Especially when that homage is as well-shot and well-acted as this one is.

photo credit: moviedex.com

Of course, things blow up.

 

Much has also been made of the movie’s many anachronisms—the two most obvious being mentions of Rubik’s Cubes and Walkmen, neither of which was available in America until 1980. Yes, these things jar, and yes, I did shave off a bit of star for them, but the way I see it, this is Abrams’ love letter to the time period, rather than something he exhaustively researched, and he wrote it how he remembered it. Should he have gone back and checked that all his cultural references actually made sense given the setting, or maybe changed the year to 1981? Yeah, he probably should have. Am I going to say “this movie is crap and you shouldn’t watch it” because he didn’t, as some of the more vociferous critics on the IMDB boards have? Of course not. That would be like saying “you shouldn’t see The Serpent and the Rainbow because Zakes Mokae is from South Africa, not Haiti.” Ridiculous.

You may have to be of a certain age to get the most out of this movie, but as far as I’m concerned, just go with it and you’ll have a very good time. *** ½

 

Trailer.

Alice in Murderland (2010): “I Have Never Approved of Your Selection of Young Mates, Mallory.”

Alice in Murderland (Dennis Devine, 2010)

photo credit: familyvideo.com

Down the rabbit-bunghole…

I will say this right up front: Alice in Murderland, a ridiculous attempt at making a themed slasher film, is one of the single worst movies I have ever actually sat all the way through. It comes in at much less than an hour and a half, but it feels like twice that length. The only reason I’m giving it half a star is that I finished watching it, and it’s not patently offensive in its theme or content. It is the rare film that makes me with I had that hour and change of my life back, but Alice in Murderland falls squarely into that category. If you are one of the short-attention-span crowd, I will tell you now that you should flee screaming in terror rather than subjecting yourself to this waste of celluloid. But if you are the type of masochist who insists on knowing why you should flee screaming in terror rather than subjecting yourself to this waste of celluloid, then by all means read on.

photo credit: horrorcultfilms.co.uk

At least half the movie’s budget went to costume rental from Ambiance.

Plot: twenty-one years ago, Alice’s mother was murdered on her own twenty-first birthday. Now Alice (Fame‘s Maleria Grady), her own twenty-first birthday approaching, is trying to find something to take her mind off her own mortality. Her sorority sisters plan an Alice in Wonderland-themed twenty-first birthday party to take place at the newly-purchased performance space of Mr. White (Rush Hour‘s Christopher Senger), uncle of sorority sister Malory (Sawblade‘s Marlene Mc’Cohen)…which just happens to be the house where Alice’s mother was murdered. True to form, once the sorority sisters and Mr. White are not-so-safely ensconced in the space, a serial killer begins preying on the crew.

photo credit: shaanig.com

The scene whence the quote that provides the review’s subtitle.

In short: the script is ludicrous, the acting is terrible across the board, the cinematography (especially the lighting in the indoor scenes, which is most of the movie) is well below the standards of competence, the choreography (in the catfight scene) is laughable… I could go on, but honestly, I can’t see a reason to. There is not a single redeeming quality to this movie, and I’m including the fact that the majority of the cast is made up of young, hot women who all got their costumes from the generic-sexy-costume shop. Yes, everything about this movie is so bad I couldn’t even concentrate on the hot young things in skimpy outfits. Now that’s bad. ½

If you feel like it, the trailer.