A romance-comedy with a sci-fi twist, the film follows a young loner who meets a strange girl one night on his birthday. After some crazy memorable situations, they part ways, but not before she claims to be from the future. Love-struck, the young man thinks nothing of it and spends the rest of the year wondering if he'll ever see her again.

A year passes and it's his birthday again, and the girl returns; or has she? In her place is a cyborg, which has entrusted itself to the man; a sworn protector and crime fighter! Actually, not really, but she does help the guy go through his everyday life. Well, the crime-fighting part isn't all false either. Given that she has incredible speed and strength (being a cyborg), she does find the time to save a kid from getting hit by a bus, a group of students from a hostage situation, and another set of kids from a fire.

It's obvious from "My Sassy Girl" that the writer/director was really into story-telling and sci-fi stuff, and he got to act on that fantasy with "Cyborg Girl", and in a big way. The film is surprisingly big-budgeted for a romance-comedy (you'll know why if you watch it) and offers some pretty decent CGI effects. Much like the previous features, our leads get into some silly, but enjoyable and funny situations, especially when the cyborg does something crazy in public. The story pays homages to the previous flicks, and obviously borrows from "Terminator", even down to the way the girl time-travels.

Funny, heart-warming, and all-around entertaining, the movie is a fun ride from the start and I urge anyone who loves a good romance-comedy (especially if you're a fan of South Korean or Japanese ones) to give this a check; you won't regret it

The movie also has an unusual amount of silly coincidences that tie into the film's plot, leading to a number of "twists" into the storyline; although it's not too hard to predict ahead of time. The film could have used its train setting more to its advantage, capitalizing on its claustrophobic setting and the use of a pitch black night drop. I could think of a number of ways it could have been scary, but director Dong-bin Kim decided to go towards the more mainstream, and clichéd way around things. The film does have its moments though, with the interesting twist of past and present, and some use of lighting in the train, adding little to a wannabe creepy atmosphere. Either way, with all its predictability and clichés aside, it's a mediocre watch for fans of Korean horror.

OVERALL:
This is yet another clichéd ghost-effort from South Korea. Although it manages to entertain, it fails in the scares department. If you're not stranger to Asian horror, then you'll probably find yourself rolling your eyes more than hiding under the covers with this one.

"Noroi the Curse" follows a similar formula, focusing around a journalist whose job is to investigate the paranormal. The movie is played out in a very real documentary style, as we're shown the case the man was last investigating leading up to his disappearance. Combined with clips from news reports and variety shows, we follow along as the man slowly unravels the mystery behind all these strange supernatural occurrences, and eventually follow the trail back to an old legend and the curse of a small town.

This movie grabs you from the beginning and doesn't let go. The way the story is told keeps you glued, as we essentially put together pieces of the puzzle--along with the journalist. The eerie atmospheric music, combined with a number of creepy scenes involving symbols and strange images in the background, will likely give anyone chills down their spine. We are shown strange things here and there, but the film is mostly an investigative piece that forces you to pay attention to detail. This is what makes the movie achieve a creepy factor that many other cinematic efforts attempt to reach, but fail along the way.

Viewers may recognize Kôji Shiraishi's name behind his mediocre films "Ju-Rei" and "Carved", which both have US DVD releases. For some reason the only movie in the man's record that's worth a damn isn't available here yet. However, word is that it will get a release later in the year, so keep an eye out.

OVERALL:
The film's story is told in a realistic documentary style and forces the viewer to pay attention to detail, as we put together clues along-with the journalist. That, combined with the eerie atmospheric music and strange supernatural events, the movie reaches a stage of creepiness that's uncommon in today's modern cinema. Give this baby a check, but be sure to watch it with the volume up and the lights off.

The students are taken and thrown into an area where a white line is drawn in the middle and they are given a choice whether to participate in this war against the "Wild 7" or not. The catch is if they refuse, they die, so it's not really much of a choice. Around this time we see those pesky collars again, but naturally the rules are different since it's a new act. This time the students must travel in pairs and are given 72 hours to successfully kill Nanahara. If one of the pairs die, the other dies; if they don't kill Nanahara within' the desired time, they all die. They are also given "danger zones" much like the first movie, so that they keep moving to their goal. Nanahara and his group of terrorists are all reportedly held up in a remote island, so the students from the new act are sent there to take him out. This is where the film begins to resemble "Saving Private Ryan" a bit, with all the gunfire, gritty images, and shaky camera shots. Sending students to take care of the job obviously wasn't a good idea, considering a good portion of them die within minutes of the attack on the island. Eventually we see Nanahara after the remaining students meet up and join forces with him, which I thought was a predictable, but interesting twist. When Nanahara's first introduced to the students he goes on a rant about war and how he even found happiness in a country thats been in war for 20-or-so years, I.E. Afghanistan.

The United States was discreetly referred to as "that country" when talks of war was going on. It was obvious who they were attempting to put the blame to without actually saying anything. There are lots of flaws in this movie and it maybe due in part that original director Kinji Fukasaku sadly died in the first days of filming and his son Kenta Fukasaku had to take over. It seemed as though a lot of the characters in the movie were put there just to be killed off and more blood be shown on screen, because a lot of the students had little-to-no character development, unlike the first film where almost all the students had their own personality. An interesting plot-twist in this movie is that the daughter of the original BR-teacher, played by Takeshi Kitano, is in this film and actually joins the BR2 act in order to exact revenge against Nanahara, who killed her father in the first movie. Sadly that key plot-point isn't really fully played out, because after half of the film we are thrown in a plot where it's everyone against the guys behind the new act. On a plus side the movie does have some good battle scenes and it's fair share of blood. I also liked some of the new characters we were introduced to. Sadly the chick that survived with Nanahara at the end of the first BR isn't even mentioned in the movie until towards the end of the flick.

I'm not quite sure how to react to Riki Takeuchi's performance to replace Takashi Kitano as the teacher in charge of the operation. His performance seemed way too over-the-top and over-dramatic to the point of being silly at times. On a plus-side, Takashi Kitano had a cameo in a flashback that his daughter has, and the smiling girl from the opening scene from the first BR has a small role in this film. Cameos are always cool in my opinion. In the end I decided on a 7 [out of 10] rating, because I enjoyed the movie, but not as much as the original. It has many faults, but it was good to see some BR action going on again--but sadly a lot of that was drowned out with sappy sympathetic moments and rants from Nanahara. Damn him! I loved the ending to the first BR, but I really didn't like how this one ended. It seemed like the message that they were struggle to get across throughout the movie was all for nothing. Bah. Be sure to look out for the Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid ripoff towards the end.

OVERALL:
A sad disappointment compared to the original. It has interesting elements, but they are shadowed with plot-holes and over-dramatic and silly-sympathetic scenes. There's good action, but it fails to have the same brutality or impact as the first did. See this if you're a big fan of the first movie, but don't get your hopes up like I did.

In the film we follow an ambitious young reporter named Angela, who's the host of a late night television program, who along with her cameraman, decide to feature the latest episode on firefighters and what they do when they're on the job. After spending most of the night with the men (watching their usual routine of relaxing and waiting for a call), the siren finally roars, and Angela and her cameraman are off to the scene. On their way to an apartment building, the firemen know little of what they're actually called out for, but once there, they discover that there's no fire, but an old woman is in some sort of distress in one of the upper floors.

Following the firemen, Angela and the rest of the crew are witness to what seems to a bloody and very violent and hysterical old woman. It doesn't take long for them to realize that something's off about some of the tenants in the upper floors and before they can find out what exactly is going on, they're sealed inside the building, with word from authorities on the outside that the building and those inside it are quarantined and not to leave the premises. Now, not only are the survivors stuck in with a group of infectious rage-induced violent psychopaths, but there appears to be no escape. Angela and her cameraman capture all the details, unraveling clues of what's happening along the way.

I've seen a handful of P.O.V. camera-themed films, but this is probably the worst, in terms of keeping the camera clear, well lit, and steady. In fact, there are a lot of scenes that spend a little too long being either too dark or too blurry. Although, I understand that they tried to capture everything as real as possible, I would think that an experienced cameraman would know how to fix a blurry scene in a matter of seconds. I guess I can excuse some of it to being in danger, but it seriously ruins a number of potentially scary scenes. There's also a lot of shaky camera business, but I had a harder time dealing with the blurry or dark ones to even care whether the camera was steady or not. You'll probably often find yourself wondering what you're actually looking at, especially when the action finally kicks in.

That's pretty much my only gripe about the movie. The rest of the film is pretty solid in my book, although it does get a little slow in the halfway point, but that's only to establish the situation and characters, so it's excusable. So what the hell is causing everyone to become like this? Taking cues from 28 Days Later, it's apparently some sort of mutated form of the rabies virus, causing its victims to become filled with rage. The virus can be transmitted with the saliva, so naturally those bitten also become infected, and depending on their blood type, the symptoms can occur in a matter of minutes or a matter of hours.

Like I said before, the film had a chance to offer a series of potentially scary scenes, but thanks to the lack of lighting and blurry camerawork, we're left with only a lot of yelling and screaming. However, the ending is probably one of the scariest moments in the movie, and we're luckily given a somewhat clear shot of what's happening. The film couldn't have ended any better, in my opinion. The US remake was greenlit shortly after the original started to get publicity, so expect to catch that in October of this year. I'm sure it'll offer scenes that'll be easier to see, so I'm not entirely opposed of the remake, but whether it'll actually be scary or not remains to be seen.

OVERALL
Although the movie is good, many of its scenes suffer from being either too dark, out of focus, or just damn shaky, so a lot of potentially scary scenes are lost. Even though this is one of the worst P.O.V. films I've seen in terms of giving the audience a clear view of what's happening, it's still remains as one of the best in the sub-genre. So, if you can sit through all that mess, you'll be given an entertaining watch, with a somewhat chilling climax. Check this one out whenever you get a chance.

Although the movie isn't high in gore or body-count, the excellent performance by Terry O'Quinn and the intriguing storyline keeps you interested. With the daughter poking her nose where it shouldn't belong, to witnessing Jerry go through his many transformations into his other life, it almost seems like the slow-pacing isn't a factor in this. When it is time for the action to pick up, the brutality and rage Terry can produce on screen makes you forget that there isn't a whole lot of blood or gore in these kills. It's the intensity he can bring to the screen that makes you fear his character, especially because he plays the perfect father in one scene and have a total outburst in the other. This is definitely one of those underrated 80's horror movies that you may catch on late-night television and still remember years later. If you're looking to purchase this on DVD you'll need an all-region DVD player, because there's currently no Region 1 release of it in the US. Who knows how the proposed remake will be, but I doubt there's an actor out there that can top Terry O'Quinn's performance as "The Stepfather".

OVERALL: This is a memorable underrated 80s horror film that deserves a SE DVD treatment in the US. Check this film out if you can get your hands on it.

It's basically about this cryogenic lab that has many frozen customers already inside little capsules. One night during a power-outage and while it's raining two security guards decide to bring the capsules out in the open. As expected, they get struck by lightening and then become the undead, which end up looking more like green space aliens than anything. The movie started off like it would be serious - talking about how cryogenics is being worked on and how the movie would depict what could happen if it went wrong - but then after watching the terrible acting and viewing the unrealistic gunfight shared between bank robbers and cops, I realized that it was gonna be pretty bad.

It was funny to watch how after someone got shot by a shotgun we'd see what looked like a ketchup stain on their t-shirt, which I guess I would assume to be their wound. I figured since Linda Blair was in the movie that it would be decent, but she didn't have a very big role and most of what she did was run and hide. Not only was the story bad, but the also the character development. It was obvious that the makers of the film just wanted to make a zombie film and they just threw a bunch of crap together to make it seem like it really had a plot.

Despite all that, I enjoyed watching the "undead" go about killing people in the lab, but it seemed like whatever they did, they just couldn't escape their limited budget and the actor’s horrible performances. I also thought the ending was just stupid. It reminded me of those romantic-teen comedies from the 80s, where they would put a picture of the character at the end of the film and showed a caption below saying what they went on to do or become. It was just too damn silly to be used in a horror film. Bah! I would have given the movie a lower-rating, but it was interesting in parts and it wasn't as bad as other horror films that I have seen.

OVERALL: A wasted zombie movie, if you'd even call it that. The zombies in this film were basically just green space aliens with glowing eyes, in my opinion. Don't bother with this.

The film debuted with mixed reviews and horrible box office totals, only making $2-million out of its $8-million budget. It makes sense, in a way, considering a movie like this is hard to market, since it really has no audience. It's rated R and doesn't have enough to appeal to a younger audience, and older viewers may find the thin premise a bit uninspiring. Regardless of the slack the film has received, I personally liked it. It took a while to kick in, but when it did I was glued to the screen, especially when it came down to the deaths.

The premise can't get any simpler than this -- a woman working late attempts to make it to her sister's in time for Christmas, but fails to even leave the parking garage when her car won’t start. A nearby security guard offers some assistance, but obviously has no intention of actually getting it working again. It doesn't take long before the woman finds herself chained to a table and spends the rest of the night trying to escape the guard and his vicious canine. Like I said before, the movie really doesn't pick up until 25/30-minutes in, after they've established some character development and the guard reveals his misguided feelings towards the woman. After that it's pretty much just a lengthy escape, with a couple dead co-workers thrown into the mix.

The movie offered some decent tension, but left behind a couple plot-holes. Although a lot of bases were covered that took care of how difficult it was for the woman to escape, there were still a couple ways left over that I felt they might've missed. Just a couple minor details that I suppose can be overlooked. On another note, Wes Bentley is a decent actor, but he just wasn't believable as the crazy security guard, and even left me laughing at his numerous outbursts towards the woman. Was that supposed to be creepy? I just saw the character as some lonely weirdo and not some psycho killer that'd stop at nothing to get what he wants, which was what they seemed to be going for. Either way, I still liked the movie, and regardless of the box office numbers, it'll still make its money back in DVD sales.

OVERALL: The film starts off a bit on the slow side, but picks up and delivers a fairly good thriller. Though not specifically scary, it did offer some decent tension and pretty gory deaths. Worth a check with an open mind.

Originally titled "13" (after the unused floor that they're stuck in) the film is the effort from first-time director Kit Ryan, and tells the story of a man named Ritchie (Stephen Dorff) who's in debt with the Russian mob after they helped his mother immigrate from Russia and start a new life. A professional thief, Ritchie now has one last job to do for the mob before he's finally set free from the debt, but it'll also prove to be his hardest task yet. Teamed up with a couple goofy brothers, the trio are sent to steal a golden cross from the penthouse of a Russian skyscraper. After successfully obtaining the cross, the trigger-happy older brother makes a scene in the elevator after some people refuse to get off, which eventually alerts security and forces the elevator the stop on the unused 13th floor.

Now the theives have a group of hostages to take care of as they attempt to negotiate with the police via a two-way radio. Little do they know that the person on the other end of the radio is one of two twin psychopathic serial killers (one of which believes he's the reincarnation of Russian ruler "Ivan the Terrible") that make short use of the hostages and would-be thieves. Fans of the UK horror-comedy Severance will likely take a shining to this, as two films are similar in gore and comedic aspects, although this film goes a step further by delivering over-the-top characters and gore sequences. The movie is pretty fun from the start, from the interesting and goofy characters that you either love or hate, to the ridiculous dancing lead killer that has rigged the floor with traps, and uses a variety of ancient weapons to dice up his victims.

The only problem I have with the flick is where most of the film is taken place -- the unused 13th floor -- as it gets a little tiresome seeing the lead characters constantly running from one corner to the other (that all look the same), and sometimes looking far too much like a movie set than it should. It also seemed like they could have done a better job in terms of traps, since we really only get one main trap, which wasn't all that great to begin with either. However, this can be overlooked since there was a lot of time for character development, and managed to deliver a good amount of gore-candy for us fans.

OVERALL: This is a relatively unheard of over-the-top gore-filled horror comedy that not only has comedy that works, but fun characters that you can root for as well. Worth a check whenever it gets a US release.

The movie's premise is also short and to the point -- a woman named "Sarah" loses her boyfriend in a car accident, leaving her alone with her unborn child, who's still kicking in her belly. Distraught over her loss, she confines herself in her home; counting the days before she finally gives birth. However, this night wouldn't be like any other night, as she's woken up by the sound of knocking at her door. A shadowy figure is seen outside, who reveals herself to be a woman having car trouble and in need of a phone. Sarah obviously doesn't fall for such a foolish trick, and attempts to shoo her away. However, this strange woman reveals that she knows Sarah's name and other bits of information that only someone who knows her personally or has been stalking her would know. The rest of the film is played out with Sarah trying to survive the rest of the night from the crazy woman, who wants what's in her belly.

Since the film is relatively short, the action picks up pretty early on. After about 20-minutes of character development and setting the scene, the crazy woman makes her appearance and pretty much gives Sarah hell for the rest of the night, offing anyone who comes to visit. I wasn't sure how they could make a movie set in pretty much one location with very few characters without it getting rather dull, but they somehow pulled it off and I wasn't bored one bit. The movie offers some decent tense situations, but it really shines when it comes to the blood and guts, which we get an extensive amount of. Call me morbid, but I couldn't help but laugh when I saw how much blood would squirt from a victim's neck. Artery or not, it was just so excessive! It’s no wonder that the Weinstein’s are only releasing this movie on DVD here in the US, because it definitely wouldn't be able to handle a theatrical release without getting an NC-17 by the horrible MPAA.

OVERALL: Once again we have to turn to France to find a good horror movie. We've got a fresh premise, some tense scenes, and simply put: this is one of the bloodiest horror films I've seen in a while. Look out for this one when it hits DVD later this year.

Hatchet is a throwback of classic slashers from the 80's (namely the Friday the 13th series), with writer/director Adam Green successfully attempting to bring that old school feel and flavor by dishing out gratuitous nudity, violence, and gore, which just so happens to also be perfect recipe for a highly entertaining horror flick! The 80's is my personal favorite decade for the genre, and Hatchet definitely does bring that style back, but sadly loses its mark when it ends abruptly, and you come to realize the film was nothing more than 'Girls Gone Wild' the first half, and lots of bloody deaths and running away the second. I don't think I've ever seen a movie that had so much running involved without actually reaching any sort of destination. The whole entire second half is nothing more than the group trying to escape from Victor in the swamps, and somehow still getting picked off one by one. It also seems like the movie holds the record for the most main-villain knockouts, with Victor going down up to four times (from what I can remember) and each time the remaining survivors would simply run away again instead of finishing the job (yeah, like he's not gonna get up again like he did the past three times already).

Like I brushed on earlier, this film is an obvious nod to the F13 films, with the swamps of Louisiana replacing the misty waters of Camp Crystal Lake. In this movie we follow a group of adventure-seeking tourists as they attend a cheesy over-priced ride through the bayou, only to get stranded after the boat collides with a series of rocks. The crew also just so happens to become lost near the old Crowley home, where the locals believe the spirit of Victor Crowley still haunts the grounds. As legend has it, a man (Kane Hodder) had a disfigured son, whom he kept hidden away in his home in order to protect him from bullies and peering eyes. When a prank by a few kids goes wrong one night, the boy is seemingly burnt to death in the home and now whoever passes through the area winds up either dead or missing. What Hatchet lacks in story does make up for in gore and awesome deaths. Although the ripping-jaw-death (my favorite in the film) has been done before, I don't think it has been perfected as well as it has in this movie. There's literally buckets of blood being thrown around (which looks ridiculous, but does add to the camp factor).

This is a movie made by horror fans and will pretty much only speak to horror fans, which is why so many of us have taken a liking to it. It's a pretty brutal and ballsly slasher that has its ups and downs -- it's fun and gore-filled, but it's way too short (75-minutes, with another 5-minutes worth of credits), and delivers a ridiculously simple story. The gore works in its favor, but to be honest, most of us have generally matured as an audience and demand slightly more story-wise, and we especially don't need any more back-from-the-dead unstoppable killers; we've already seen our favorites either in space or battling-it-out with rappers. Hatchet could have been a great film if more of an effort was made towards the story instead of focusing it all on the gore. Sure the gore is great, but what's left in the movie if all that's taken away?

OVERALL: Hatchet is a fun ride, but (much like a ride) once things start moving along, before you know it, it's over. The first half is nothing but dirty jokes and T&A, while the second half is a lot of running in circles and bloody deaths. The movie has its ups and downs, but when it all comes down to it, it's still an entertaining watch. What it lacks in story it makes up for in gore and great deaths. Worth a check, but don't expect much story-wise.

The comedy is actually pretty funny for the most part, which is good since the flick doesn't offer much as far as action goes. There's a little in the beginning, and in the middle of the film. The end has the biggest chunk of the action. This is definitely the weakest of the trilogy, but it's still an entertaining movie.

If you haven't seen any of the films, I'd recommend at least checking the first for the comedy and action; and if you like it, check out the sequel, which brings back most of the characters from the first. Avoid the third unless you just want to see a Korean comedy.

I think what I liked most about the movie were the sweet death scenes, which were some of the most original death scenes I've seen in a horror movie, and considering it was uncut I was sure not to miss any of the gore. Some of the more memorable scenes would have to be where a girl gets totally ripped to shreds when glass breaks in front of her. Another is where a guy gets his ribs crushed when he uses one of the weight equipment; pretty sweet stuff. It was also cool to see Ken Foree in the movie. You might remember him as the black fellow from Dawn of the Dead. Very cool guy. We also see a small cameo from the girl that played Hilary from the Fresh Prince of Bel Air. I was hoping she'd have a nude scene, but sadly she didn’t.

The acting is average stuff you see coming from the 80s and so is the directing. The only stuff I really didn't like about the movie were the plot-holes. Other than that I enjoyed it and that's why I decided to give it a 6-rating. If you see this movie, try to catch the uncut version. I don't know how much they cut from the regular version, but it must be a lot. There are some really cool gory scenes.

OVERALL

Some might disagree, but to me it's a very underrated 80's horror film. It had some really sweet death scenes and gore. Only bad thing about the movie are the plot-holes. Check this film and try to get the uncut version.

COMMENTS
Didn't know much about this film before seeing it, but judging from the pics on the back of the DVD cover it looked really gory. The funny thing is this movie has like 9 other titles. It's like they kept changing their mind on what they wanted to call it.

Anyway, the story is about a whacked out scientist who lives on this small island that is inhabited by cannibals. He does some weird experiements which bring the dead back to life. An expeditiong goes to the island and not-long-after they are hunted down by the crazy cannibals and zombies.

The look of the zombies were okay. They are better than some zombies I've seen in other films, but it isn't anything to brag about. Some of them look pretty funny. Like most films, you don't get to see the zombies until towards the end of the movie.

The best thing I liked about this movie would have to be the gore. A movie about cannibals and zombies would HAVE to have a lot of gore. The directing was okay and the acting was sucky in parts. Would have given the movie a lower-rating, but I liked all the gore and excess nudity. Other than that it's nothing too special.

OVERALL
Not a very good zombie film, but a good movie to watch if you're looking for a lot of gore. The zombies looked funny and most of it was really just about the cannibals on the island. Check this if you want gore.

As stated above, our main character is a female detective, who, after foiling up a recent bust in hopes of catching a criminal, is forced to go undercover and pose as a High School student in order to be-friend the daughter of the criminal that they could have caught sooner. This obviously isn't the most original plot, but regardless it still works thanks to the interesting characters and situations that we encounter throughout the film.

The movie also had a couple engaging sub-plots, such as when the "toughest" girl in school is beat up by the detective, so there are a few instances where she attempts to get revenge, like when she gets some weirdo and his cronies to fight her. We've also got a very small romantic sub-plot involving another new student whom the detective falls for, but what his real intentions for also be-friending the criminal's daughter is up for question. There's also a sub-plot involving a concerned teacher played by Sang-Myeon Park of My Wife is a Gangster-fame (he played the husband).

The movie isn't all about the comedy either, as it does have a handful of scenes involving a lot of people gettin' their asses handed to'em by our leads. In the end the movie is another solid addition to South Korea's continuous number of successful action-comedies.

On another note, does anyone else think the circled Korean guy on the left looks like Terrence Howard from Hustle and Flow? Maybe it's just me. 7/10

COMMENTS
This is the live-action version of the Devilman OVA (original video anime) and manga series in Japan. The manga dates back to the early 70's, which also spawned a year-long animated series. It wasn't until the late 80's and early 90's that we saw a rebirth of the series in OVA form. It also spawned a Devillady spinoff in '98. I've seen the two early OVAs and the Devillady series, but I don't believe I've seen the short OVA that came out in 2000, nor have I desired to see the original 70s' series. I can't say that I'm a fan of the anime, but I did find it quite interesting. When I heard they were making a live-action version I was curious to see how it'd turn out. Though, when I first viewed the trailer I questioned whether it was even live-action since most of the footage shown was jam-packed with computer effects. Now having viewed the film I have to say that they should have spent more time on the script, because it's a mess.

The film combines many elements from the OVAs that I've seen, and even hinting at a Devillady, although we don't actually see her. The story basically follows a skinny dweeb who becomes a half-demon or "Devilman" after the accidental release of some sort of supernatural force within the Antarctic. This virus somehow spreads throughout the rest of the world, turning normal people into demonic beings and causing amok among society. Now it's up to the Devilman to attempt to put a stop to the madness. The movie has a lot of small sub-plots, like how normal people become paranoid of others when they show sign of something different. This eventually leads to unruly mobs and vigilantism. The government also creates a place to quarantine supposed "demons". All of this is shown, but never fully explored or explained, but then there are a lot of things in this film that were never explained.

The biggest problem I have with the movie aside from the numerous plot-holes would be the hacky acting by the leads, who just happen to be teen pop-idols in Japan. Actually, most of the lead cast are either teen idols or models. Speaking of bad cast-choices, who do we get as an American newscaster but six-foot-five-inch, 250+ lb former NFL player-turned-actor Bob Sapp, whom you may have seen in films like Elektra and The Longest Yard remake. This film really tested his acting abilities by forcing him to use more than the usual "looking tough and mean" form of acting, like when it was called for him to look scared, he made sure to move his eyes around a lot and say "oh my god" a couple times. Why most of Japan would even broadcast an American news station is beyond me, but I guess that was the only way director Hiroyuki Nasu was able to show how the virus spread through the globe, and very poorly so.

The story is just plain cluttered and loaded with scenes that don't make sense. Like for one instance when the lead Fudo (Hisato Izaki) and his love interest go to a church (while demons are still popping up over the world) only to talk about how they want to spend their futures together. What the hell? How does that benefit the story? Then in the end we're treated to a final showdown between the Devilman and his best friend, whom also got special powers the same time Fudo (Devilman) did. I have to admit by this point I dozed off a couple times, but from what I saw it looked like a great cinematic from a newly-released PS2 game. Good work on the CGI guys (sarcasm). I have to admit that even though the movie had a lot of problems, I still liked the plot of demons popping up over the world and causing society as we know it turn upside down, and eventually leading to the end of the world. After everything's said and done, the flick fails; leaving fans of the anime rolling their eyes; appalled by this live-action addition to series.

OVERALL
After the long wait I had to endure after its release in Japan back in October of '04, I am severely disappointed. Not only was the story a huge mess, but the acting and leads were horrible. Casting a former NFL player as a news reporter? What a waste. See this flick if you like video game cinematics, because that's what it feels like you're watching when witnessing all the lame computer effects.

REVIEW: Ikenie or Sacrifice, as it is called when translated to English, reminded me of the many slasher films to come out of the 80s, because the beginning of the movie took place in the woods and there was lots of sex, which is common in 80s slashers. What drew me into the film was reading about the girl coming back as a doll. I like those movies where it's a doll killer or something, and that's why I wanted to check this film out. I was very disappointed.

I knew I wasn't going to expect much from this movie, but I didn't expect it to be this bad. The acting was horrible and so was the plot. The death scenes were dull and there was way too much sex and nudity than the movie needed. It all just became pointless. The doll that the girl came back was a life-size doll that looked somewhat creepy, but that didn’t help anything, considering there's nothing scary or tense about this film at all.

I'm still left confused as to what really happened in the movie, because there were many plot-holes. I've seen many Japanese horror flicks and they all pretty much have a lot of originality and good acting, but this movie has neither. The only reason why I gave the movie a 2-rating instead of a 1 was, because it was interesting in some scenes and it isn't a crappy film to me, but it is a bad one. I was hoping to see some kind of twist or something at the end of the movie, but instead I got some dumbass scene of the doll getting emotional and walking away and I'm left thinking, this better not be the damn ending or I'm gonna be pissed. Bah to that!

OVERALL: A Japanese horror film that doesn't offer the creepiness and original story-line that many others have. I'm sure you've never heard of this movie other than today, so lets just pretend you never read this review, because the movie sucks.

The movie really wouldn't be much without its interesting leading characters:

We've got the local drunkard who someone stumbled his way into the village. Despite no one knowing who he is or where he came from, he's still a valuable asset to the cause as he's an expert in duel axe-wielding.

Then we've got the powerful leader with his silly straight mustache; possibly a descendant of Bill the Butcher from Gangs of New York. Never-the-less he's a great leader and manages to take on many foes at once.

Next we have the kind-hearted warrior with his strong-willed pregnant wife. He has much to lose, but still chooses to put his life on the line for the good of the village.

Of course there are other supporting characters like two leading females (one is the guy's wife) and the leader that was wounded in battle, which led them to look for the Bill look-a-like. I like the movie -- it has emotion (but not too much) and interesting fight scenes. I also liked the setting, because it's not everyday that I catch a war-flick that involves more sword-duel-wielding than automated weapons.

The only downside I have is some of the choreography looked a bit awkward at times. I also expected a little more blood and guts going on. Luckily, the director ended up saving all that good stuff in the sweet climactic battle, which is my favorite part of the movie. We're treated with a nice 20-minute battle sequence; Cool stuff!

Recommended if you're lookin' for something different. 7/10

COMMENTS
I didn't really know much about this film except that it was another one of those supernatural asian films. The plot kind of reminded me of The Eye so I figured I'd check it out...

The plot is about a girl who sees ghosts. She ends up visiting a psychologist about it and he proves that it's all in her head and in the process falls in love with her. After she is cured the psychologist himself begins seeing these ghosts.

The movie was interesting, but it really didn't have any good scary or creepy parts compared to The Eye or Ringu. I did like the plot a bit, because it starts off pretty unoriginal but once more is revealed it starts to get a lot more interesting. The twist towards the end was a little predictable, but good. I didn't really like the ghosts in this film. They looked a little funny and not as scary as the ones I've seen in other films.

The main ghost towards the end made unusual door-creaking noises whenever it moved its joints, which I thought was quite odd and sometimes funny. The directing and acting wasn't bad. It had good atmosphere at times. I would have given it a lower-rating, but it wasn't a bad film it just needs more work with script. If you're looking for something more in terms of tension and scares see the films I mentioned above.

OVERALL
A decent HK film. Interesting, but not as scary or as good as other Asian films I've seen. Check this if you're a fan of any Asian horror, but not recommended.

COMMENTS
This is another one of South Koreas attempt at a horror film that just so happens to be very similar to the Japanese Ringu (no surprise!), down to the ridiculously-long-hair-covering-half-the-body-and-face-only-leaving-one-weird-looking- eye-to-scare-the-audience technique. The movie is just oozing with originality! (Obvious sarcasm). Though, even with the lack of anything new I did find the flick to be rather interesting and I thought the ending was the only thing that saved it from getting a lower rating. The climax that reveals the truth behind all the weird stuff that has been going on (although it is somewhat confusing) is probably the best part of the movie.

The story for this flick revolves around a young female college student who has recovered from a serious accident, which led her to have amnesia. As she attempts to put her past together and get her current life straightened out, she slowly comes to realize that those she associated with in high school are now turning up dead and all are keyed to water. Hmmm, weird. As fragments of her memories and the people she knew come together, she experiences weird visions of a girl drowning and what she thinks is a ghost following her around. Could there be a connection?

If you put two of Japanese director Hideo Nakata's films Ringu, and Dark Water, and a little bit of Memento Mori together you've got yourself Dead Friend. The movie is seriously lacking in originality (like stated above), but somehow makes it up towards the end? Although the movie isn't spectacular, I did enjoy the "twist" and I honestly didn't really see it coming as I'm usually able to do. If you're experienced with Asian horror cinema already you won’t find the same-old scares effective enough to scare you, much like it hasn't for me and other veterans of the genre.

OVERALL
The same-old thing we've seen done before. The only thing I liked about the movie was the interesting and somewhat unpredictable ending. Only worth a check if you've got extra money to blow and if you're really into Asian horror.

I enjoyed this movie, despite it being a draining two-hours -- it tend to drag on a bit with excessive dialogue during certain scenes. Though, thanks to the characters and some of the comedy relief that some characters bring to the table, we're never really bored by what's going on. The story successfully manages to keep the viewer guessing as to who really is behind the murder, which is normally something hard to come-by now-a-days. A couple interesting points which I liked most, would be how the film takes place in a 48-hour time-frame, revealing how even a stone-cold murder case can fall apart when further clues surface.

COMMENTS
I heard about this film a while back and thought it sounded very interesting, so I was glad to finally check it out. It's just too bad the official DVD release doesn't have English subtitles. I had to get an unofficial copy off ebay, because those are the only ones that offered the subtitles.

The movie hooks you from the beginning when over 50 high school students commit a mass suicide by throwing themselves in front of a subway train. Very intense scenes and they didn't hold back on the blood and gore. The story, like I said above, is basically about a detective that is trying to find the cause of all the suicides in Japan.

This is a pretty good film that should please gore fans, like myself. I was a bit confused towards the end, but then again I heard from the director some time ago that the movie wasn't really supposed to make sense. What I liked most about this was how the director made the deaths somewhat humorous at times. Much like what they did in Final Destination 2, the deaths were ironic and gave the audience something to laugh at, because we all know that suicide isn't funny, but you can't help but laugh at some of the stuff they come up with here.

The movie actually does have some creepy scenes at times, which surprised me, because I thought it wasn't going to really go towards that direction. It wasn't a bad thing. The directing and acting is pretty good and I really enjoyed the gore and humor in the deaths, which is why I decided to give the movie a solid 7-rating. It's a good film.

Suicide Club is the international title, but the literal English title would be Suicide Circle, which is why it says that on the poster. I'm awaiting the next official DVD release of this movie, which will hopefully have English subtitles. The unofficial version really sucks.

OVERALL
Good movie that plays with suicide. Loaded with blood and gore. I recommend this film.

COMMENTS:
Ah, where should I begin? Well, I wasn't sure what exactly to expect from the movie since I couldn't find much info on it, but I generally had an idea that I'd end up with mixed feelings. Well I was semi-right. The movie ended up just being a complete and predictable bore. It's a sad thing, coming from the same director of Whispering Corridors, which I thought was a fairly decent ghost flick. The movie started out interesting, but immediately goes into bore-mode until the last 20-or-so minutes of the film.

The story is basically about a couple that decides to adopt a young boy after failing to have a child of their own. They pick out a seemingly nice boy that they discover is a bit of a trouble-maker. A year passes and the couple discovers that the wife's pregnant. Fast-forward another year and the baby is out and about, which obviously displeases the troubled boy. After noticing a loss of attention and failed attempts of killing the child, the boy runs away from home and never seen again. This creates a downward spiral for the couple, as they start to care less and less about things, and eventually go mad, and lash out on each other.

So what the hell does the title mean? Well Acacia is apparently the tree that's in the back yard of the couple's home. When the adopted boy first moves in, the wise grandfather tells the story of rare tree and how it can grant wishes, but sadly the tree has no leaves and seems almost dead. That is of course until the boy disappears, and the tree somehow springs to life, and hell ensues soon after. The first 25 minutes of the movie is somewhat interesting with the family adjusting to their life with the boy, and gets even more interesting when the new child is born. Then after the boy runs away, it just consists of the couple slowly going crazy. That is until towards the end when the "scary" truth is revealed about what really happened. The twist at the end of the film came as no surprise to me, since I had a hunch as to what happened to the boy earlier in the film.

While watching the movie I was thinking we'd see some cool ghostly occurences happening to the couple, but we get nothing more than few images here and there and maybe an interesting death by ants. The movie really doesn't turn horror until towards the end. The rest of it is just a drama of sorts. Normally I don't mind movies that have the story and actors performances leading it, but this movie was just too damn boring. The story essentially leads nowhere, and just consisted of a lot of long and drawn-out dialogue. No scares, predictable ending, too much talking. What a waste. So why just a 5-rating? Well it had its moments here and there, and despite it being boring, it was well directed.

OVERALL:
A boring South Korean "horror" flick. Too much talking, with an incredibly slow pace. Don't bother.

Set in the early 1600's, the film follows a group of poor villagers as they get the aid of 5 skilled swordsmen to help fight against an evil general and his army of bounty hunters. Apparently a new government has been established banning any use of martial arts (except for those enforcing the law) and get $$ for each dead martial artist. In the vein of the classic 50's Japanese classic Seven Samurai, the skilled swordsmen and a couple brave villagers fend against the army and hope to take down the new law. The plot thickens as we learn that as they flee the village there may be a traitor among them leaving clues to the enemy. Who's the traitor? And can they really take down the general and his army?

I really enjoyed this movie, and loved the post-apocalyptic feel of the beginning. There's a nice blend of swordplay and martial arts, with a lot of distinct characters to follow along with. Even the baddies had their interesting group of people. Added with all the interesting gadgets and weaponry and we've got a pretty solid popcorn flick. My only complaint is the ending, where it seemed lacking in power compared to the feel and fight scenes earlier on. There are also a lot of avenues with the swords and characters that could have been explored. Of course we're left with an arch-ending, so I'd expect more to be explored in the sequel.

In my personal opinion a best way to describe the film would be a cross between the Japanese film Azumi and South Korea's Musa: The Warrior. All-in-all if you're looking for a solid martial arts flick, with cool characters and innovative weapons, then check this.

The film basically follows a man who was once a criminal named "The Clown" because he wore a clown mask while pulling heists. Now years after a colleague killed his woman during a routine heist, he's the local mall security, whose seemingly leading a fairly simple life. That is until his old group resurfaces to pull another big heist involving tons of gold. This calls for the "clown" to make his triumphant return.

Despite all the negative, the movie is an interesting and sometimes entertaining no-brainer, but only if you look past many of its faults, most importantly the lacking character development. I suppose it might be wise to watch the series before viewing this, but for those of us who haven't seen it, all we get are brief flashback sequences.

COMMENTS
Its been a long time since I last gave a movie a 1-rating [out of 10], but A Night to Dismember certainly deserves it. With its horrible editing, script, directing, acting, and even dubbing, exploitation director Doris Wishman surely exceeds herself when it comes to making crappy films. Born in 1920 Doris Wishman didn't hit the film scene until the 60s with cheesy nudies and eventually exploitation flicks. Though, by the time Dismember was released the exploitation scene went more mainstream, leading this mess without proper distribution. Doris has been considered the "queen of exploitation" and the "female Ed Wood", but when it all comes down to it, unless you're big on incoherent storytelling, a lot of shots of people's feet, and dubbing not far off from an 80's Kung-Fu film, you're going to hate this dung pile. According to Doris, someone destroyed some negatives of the film, leaving her to make use of what was left, which would explain the 69-minute run-time and the re-use of certain scenes (like running up the stairs!). Either way, I'm sure what was destroyed probably wouldn't have been much better than what's presented.

So the "story" (written by Doris Wishman's niece -- probably when she was 12-years-old) follows a young woman named Vicki (porn star Samantha Fox) as she's released from a institution after murdering a couple people. Hoping that the trip home and time-spent with the family will do her good, Vicki is instead subjected to various scares by her siblings in hopes of making her crazy again and get sent back to the institution. Things take a turn for the worst when people start turning up dead, and naturally Vicki is to blame, but is she really the killer? Honestly, who really cares? This movie sucks. I know by the time the killer was revealed I thought back to that hilarious picture of child-actor Gary Coleman shruggin his shoulders with the words "who gives a shit?" above him. This movie is bad for many reasons -- namely the horrible editing, which may or may not have been due to the missing footage. Not only do we get some of the same scenes used-over, but a lot of annoying and nauseating fast-paced close-up shots of various people or objects.

Also, not only do we have to sit through an annoying narration by the detective character in the film (who sounds kinda like the narration guy from A Christmas Story), but all the actors had to dub their own voices. In fact, only 5% of the film is actual dialogue, and most of the time we'd hear someone talking while seeing the back of their head or a shot of their feet or some other inanimate object. Oh, it doesn't stop there! We also get to listen to old-school elevator-type music in the most inane scenes, leaving the audience to wonder whether they should laugh at the girl running away from the knife-wielding maniac while happy elevator-music is playing in the background, or to cower under the covers because knives are oh-so horrifying! A couple of the most comedic scenes in this film have to be one instance where someone's head is crushed and instead of hearing the appropriate sound effect, we get someone doing a squish-type sound with their mouth; classic! The second instance is a scene where instead of using slow motion, we get the actors actually mimicking slow motion as one of them gets stabbed with an axe; pure gold!

Now we're to expect that with exploitation there is at least some decent gore. It does have a fair amount, I'll give it that, but given its no-budget we witness some of the worst in make-up effects, like when one person gets their fingers chopped off, we clearly see them simply making a fist while hot-dog-lookin' "fingers" are spread over red paint. On the DVD cover it says something about the film having one of the most "entertaining commentary tracks ever" and I have to agree that the constant jabbering back-and-forth by Doris and cinematographer Chuck Smith is hilarious! It reminded me of one of those movies where the whole family gathers together around a Thanksgiving meal and we get the bitter grandma snappin' at the youngins for making too much noise.

OVERALL
The perfect example of everything that could possibly be wrong in a movie. As I stated above, if you like incoherent storytelling, a lot of shots of people's feet, and dubbing not far off from an 80's Kung-Fu film then feel free to subject yourself to this crap.

COMMENTS
Upon first viewing of the cover you'd expect some cheesy snake-flick, but the final result is quite the opposite. Instead, we're given a Hitchockian kidnapping thriller with a deadly snake thrown into the mix for added measure. This is a project that once had Tobe Hooper's name attached to direct, but reportedly due to "creative differences" he left, and made-for-TV-movie aficionado Piers Haggard replaced him. I'm sure Tobe was goin' for a killer snake flick, where-as the producers wanted a more psychological feel to it. I guess where it fails in snake action, it makes up for in suspense and story development.

So the story is basically about a young boy with wealthy parents, who decide to go on a vacation, leaving him with his grandfather and a couple of the hired help. Of course, they are unaware that the help actually have their on dark agenda for when the parents leave -- plotting a kidnapping in hopes of getting a whiff of some of that wealth. Their plan is foiled when a pet store mistakenly delivers a deadly black mamba to the hands of the young boy, whom was supposed to get a tamed snake as a pet instead. To top it off, one of the kidnappers becomes trigger-happy and shots a local policeman after he visits the home in response of a call about the snake-switch mishap. This obviously gets the attention of other police, which causes the kidnappers to blockade themselves in the home. Now not only can they not go outside without getting caught, but they have to look out for the black mamba as it slithers its way through the air ducts.

Although this movie is lacking in "horror" it is a good a thriller with decent acting from the cast and a solid kidnapping story. Every time when the movie would slow down a bit, a scene involving the black mamba would resurface, causing a good scare to our cast. At first I thought maybe they'd use a look-alike snake in replace of the mamba, but it turns out that they actually used a real black mamba -- crazy!

OVERALL
A good movie if you're looking for a Hitchcockian-type thriller. Don't expect a lot of snake-action though.

The story follows a father and his 6-year-old boy, a year after the boy's mother died, and how they've attempted to cope with the situation. Even with a year's time, it hasn't gotten any easier for them. That is, until one day she returned to them. Despite the fact that they were at her funeral, she was now standing in front of them, as if she never died at all -- the downside? She doesn't remember a thing. The father and son don't mention the fact that she was supposed to be dead; instead they tell her she just got into a little accident and lost her memory. It's later revealed that her return may have something to do the rainy season and an old book she wrote to boy before she died. Sadly, once the rainy season ends she will disappear just as fast she returned. Will she find out in time?

What I liked most about this movie was the excellent character development -- some of the best I've seen in a Romance. Since the mom has no memory she gets the husband to tell the story of how they first met and fell in love, so we get more insight of what kind of people they are, which gives more of an effect towards the end with the more dramatic moments. I thought I had the ending figured out, but I was wrong when the time came, revealing one twist after the other.

This is now in my list of favorite films, right next to South Korea's Romantic-Comedy My Sassy Girl. The movie keeps the viewer interested from the start by its brilliant storytelling and excellent performances, especially that of Yuko Takeuchi as the mom, whom you may remember as the lead from Ringu. The cinematography is also breathtaking, especially in certain emotional scenes. Added with its beautiful, soft, melodic music, this is truly a cinematic masterpiece amongst the Romance genre.

Not that this is much of a surprise, but the US is remaking this movie, which hopes to premiere in 2007. Jennifer Garner will star in place of Yuko Takeuchi's role as the mom. I personally don't think it will compare to the original, but we'll have to wait and see.

COMMENTS
Based on the novel by Night of the Living Dead '68 co-writer John Russo, The Majorettes is an interesting, but failed attempt, at changing the usual 80's slasher fare. Originally Effects artist Tom Savini was going to work on this film, but dropped out due to scheduling conflicts, so instead they got a newbie named Jerry Gergely to work on the effects for the kills. This explains why all we see are lame slashes to the throat by the same-old bowie knife. Had Savini not dropped out then maybe it would have been a better movie, but regardless, the film still proves to be slightly different compared to the usual 80's slasher half-way through when more details are revealed.

So the story is your typical one about some masked killer going about killing off the local cheerleading squad. The finger is pointed at a number of the stereotypical people, like the weird pervy maintenance man and the disgruntled and prone-to-violent-outbursts ex-boyfriend. Sadly, when the killer is revealed it fails to be remotely shocking since anyone who’s watched the genre long enough would have known within the first 10-minutes. Although, it is around the time that the killer is revealed that the story takes an interesting turn, making it stand-out among the rest of the slashers sub-genre. Greed and revenge is played out through the last 30-or-so minutes, stepping the story-line and action up a notch, when a boyfriend decides to take matters in his own hands and goes through his father's gun collection.

OVERALL
The flick starts off as an incredibly dull 80's slasher, but half-way through takes an interesting turn into greed and revenge, making it stand-out among the standard 80's slasher. A decent rent, but don't expect a lot.

COMMENTS
Italian director Umberto Lenzi has made dozens of horror films from cheesy gore flicks to slow-paced giallos, and I (not particular a fan of his work) still haven't found one movie of his that I actually like. Hitcher in the Dark, although is an interesting change from his usual work, proves to be no different. The story follows a spoiled young rich boy, who likes to circle the roads of Virginia Beach in hopes of picking up a female hitchhiker in his daddy's camper. Instead of dropping them off at their desired location, he takes them to the woods, where he kidnaps, tortures, sexually assaults, and eventually murders them. All thanks to his sick desires towards his deceased mother. He eventually meets a young girl who has a striking resemblance to his mother, and decides to keep her around longer than the others, even cutting and dying her hair to look more like her. Aside from avoiding the police, the man has to take care of the girl's troublesome boyfriend, who takes it upon himself to search for her after she goes missing.

Most of the movie is just a confusing slow-paced little game between the young man and the girl. There are a lot of incredibly long and drawn-out scenes that would have been better off on the cutting room floor, but instead we're subjected to witnessing such boredom. Luckily, that's why the fast-forward button was created. Not all of the film is boring, however -- there are some scenes that were fairly interesting when it seemed like the young man was going to be caught. Sadly, all the scenes within the camper were way too long, and that's where most of the movie seemed to take place.

OVERALL
Fans of Umberto Lenzi will probably be disappointed since it's a change from his usual cheese, while others may just not like the movie because it's just too damn slow. Either way, avoid.

COMMENTS
Whether I've actually seen this movie before or not will forever remain a mystery to me, but while watching it I kept thinking I've seen it before. That happens when you've watched way too many horror movies over the years. Anyway, this is the DVD-release of one of the last slasher flicks to come out of the 80's and it's actually not a bad one either. It doesn't use the same basic formula that we're used to seeing -- you know the one where the teens go camp somewhere or "party" in a a far-out and empty location only to get killed off by some shadowy or masked killer and in the end discover it's one of them that's killing everyone. Nope, this movie is a little different and that's what makes it unique and interesting.

In this movie we follow a group of teen friends -- the "tough" no-rules guy, the nice guy, the overweight doofus, and of course, the slut -- as they attempt to pull a prank on their nerdy female teacher. There's a local legend in the town of a couple killings that occurred in a swamp in the outskirts of town and so they decide to get some of the mud from that area and throw it on the windows of the teacher's home in attempt to scare the hell outta her. Little do they know that the teacher had something to do with the murders when she was a child and the prank only causes her to snap and take matters in her own hands.

I liked this flick -- it's a little slow in the middle, but I liked how the plot wasn't the same old routine, so it kept my interest. Of course most of the deaths don't occur until towards the end, but if you can sit through the movie without being bored then you'll get a decent pay off towards the end when the teacher gets her revenge on the whack students. If you look passed the plot-holes and slow pick-up of action sequences, then you'll probably dig the flick like I did. If you get the DVD you'll get to check a nice intro from critic Joe Bob Briggs, whom adds a little trivia and background on the film -- cool stuff.

OVERALL
A decent little slasher that breaks the mold of the typical theme we're all used to seeing from the 80's. Worth a check if you can sit through the story, but don't expect a lot of deaths or gore.

COMMENTS
Before director Mike Newell brought us films like Donnie Brasco and Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire, he mostly worked on made-for-TV movies, until he stepped up in the early 80's and started making feature films, this little horror movie being one of them. I never thought I'd see Charlton Heston's name before a horror movie, but after seeing the movie, I can see why. This is probably the first time I watched a mummy movie with no mummy! Throughout the film there's talk about the resurrection of the mummified Egyptian queen, but when the time finally came (the last 5-minutes) all we see is a possessed chick with a smirk on her face! What a waste of time.

The story follows a work-a-holic archeologist, whose bent on being first to discover the tomb of a mummified Egyptian queen. The time finally comes around the same time his wife is about to give birth. Naturally his work comes before his family, so while his wife is busy giving birth, he's busy dusting sand off an old tomb. Sadly, the baby is DOA... that is, until the tomb is finally opened, then the baby miraculously returns to life, but is it really a miracle or a curse? We learn 18-years-later when the daughter is all grown up and decides to visit her archeologist father that the spirit of the queen is within the young woman and plans of her resurrection through a ritual is underway.

I was expecting to watch a nice little underrated mummy movie, but instead I get Heston freakin' out over things as usual and a whole lot of slow-pacing and dialogue. The only redeeming quality the film offers is it's above-average kills, which I have to admit were pretty cool. Had it not been for the kills I probably would have kept the DVD player on fast-forward until the last 10-minutes. I suppose those who are interested in a mummy movie with more story than-mummy, then maybe this will be up their ally. I for-one was not impressed.

OVERALL
As far as mummy movies go this is a stinker -- we don't even get an actual mummy! Instead we're treated to a lot of mysterious (but cool) deaths. Check it if you're lookin' for more story-than-action when it comes to your mummy movie fix.

I enjoyed this movie, despite it being a draining two-hours -- it tend to drag on a bit with excessive dialogue during certain scenes. Though, thanks to the characters and some of the comedy relief that some characters bring to the table, we're never really bored by what's going on. The story successfully manages to keep the viewer guessing as to who really is behind the murder, which is normally something hard to come-by now-a-days. A couple interesting points which I liked most, would be how the film takes place in a 48-hour time-frame, revealing how even a stone-cold murder case can fall apart when further clues surface.

This is a very light-hearted movie that tries really hard to be funny, but sadly, it fails. Sure, it does have some funny moments, but overall it was a disappointment. I also couldn't get into either Jean Reno or Gérard Depardieu's characters. With a pencil-thin storyline and a lot of unrealistic sequences, the movie ends up more as a brainless time-waster, with an occasional chuckle here and there, but nothing more.