1. “I, Frankenstein (2014)” movie review.

    Posted by
    /
    "I, Frankenstein" is guilty of the usual critical follies, whether it be stupid dialogue, weak acting, a flimsy plot, awkward pacing or unreliable special effects. But its greatest sin is that even though it contains a non-stop onslaught of action and visual effects, it's just not very fun.
  2. “Tai Chi Hero (2012)” movie review.

    Posted by
    /
    "Tai Chi Hero" is significantly less hyperactive when it comes to its visual style, toning down much of the flash and glamor of its predecessor (Tai Chi Zero). But it seems to have become even more scatterbrained when it comes to telling the story. Yet even if it was only in pieces, the movie could be very moving and I made a connection to the characters.
  3. “47 Ronin (2013)” movie review.

    Posted by
    /
    "47 Ronin" sounds like it would be quite the lark, either as something ludicrously epic or ridiculously stupid, but entertaining all the same. Yet I can't say I ever really enjoyed myself during my viewing. The film isn't especially terrible, it's just kind of subpar and dull. At times, I WISHED it would become atrocious simply so I could feel SOMETHING as I endured it. But a las, I was overcome by its blandness.
  4. “Tai Chi Zero (2012)” movie review.

    Posted by
    /
    "Tai Chi Zero" is at its core, a very normal kung fu movie that somehow seems more unique than it really is with its random steampunk additions and bizarre stylistic touches. Yet I am not criticizing this, because it's these attributes which give "Tai Chi Zero" its identity. Without them, the flick would immediately dissipate from my memory, even if I did enjoy myself the majority of the time.
  5. “The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug (2013)” movie review.

    Posted by
    /
    "The Hobbit: The Desolation of Smaug" is about as 'good' as part 1, but before detractors start groaning in disgust and giving up on the flick, I actually think you might like it. Of the entire "Lord of the Rings" franchise, this easily has the fastest pace, never letting the viewer catch their breath for about 3 hours.
  6. “In the Name of the King II: Two Worlds (2011)” movie review.

    Posted by
    /
    “In the Name of the King 2” is bad, but much like its predecessor, it’s just generically bad. It’s what I expect out of a direct-to-DVD, low budgeted sequel to a movie that wasn’t even good to begin with- regardless of Uwe Boll’s involvement. If anything, Dolph Lundgren’s surreal performance was sometimes entertaining…But the key word is 'sometimes'. Usually I was just kind of bored.
  7. “Dynamite Warrior (2006)” movie review.

    Posted by
    /
    The fight scenes looked more like rehearsals for the real fight scenes, not the finished product. Eventually, I realized my mistake. I was watching "Dynamite Warrior" under the understanding that it was a martial arts film. In reality, it's a fantasy, adventure, western, comedy that just happens to have (Muay Thai) martial arts. Once I got used to its 'focus', I began to enjoy "Dynamite Warrior", as silly as it could be.
  8. “Solomon Kane (2009)” movie review.

    Posted by
    /
    “Solomon Kane” is an interesting hybrid of action, fantasy, drama and horror, its presentation being reminiscent of “Conan the Barbarian”. It’s not perfect though. I personally felt it required a bigger budget and it crams too much story into a single movie. Still, it’s a worthy start to what can become a pretty cool franchise.