Tag Archives: kageoween

Writing

Ghostbusters 4 1/2: Frozen Empire movie review.

Leave a comment

INTRODUCTION: So I waited a bit to see this movie until the BS died down, much like with the 2016 Ghostbusters. I think it’s helpful, especially when approaching a movie you loved for decades.

PLOT: The New Busters move back to NYC and fight a new big bad.

CHARACTERS :Very good and very well developed. Even the introduction of new characters is interesting. Pecks characters change is intriguing and interesting.

ACTING: excellent! Everyone brought their a game here.

DIALOGUE: Very well done.

STYLE: Excellent!

FX: Awesome. The mix of CGI and Practical work so well.

SUBTEXT: None. Regardless of what some people seem to say on the internet about an interpersonal relationship between one of the characters and a ghost be more than friendly ain’t there either.

CONCLUSION: Very slow burn of a movie that sets up a lot of interesting characters and equipment for a third installment. Gil Kenen did an amazing job with this movie and it made it Al the better. I very much look forward to a third installment.

4 out of 5 stars.

Writing

Kagemas, Violent Night, a review

Leave a comment

INTRODUCTION: So I love weird, especially something like this. Naturally, when I saw the trailer, I knew at some point I was going to watch and review this. I had a friend when I was younger and this is the type of shit we lived for, creating zany comics of stick figure men. A killer Santa would of had us both in theaters that very day. So I’m excited to have finally watch it.

PLOT: Santa found himself in the wrong house one Christmas Eve and becomes a reluctant hero.

CHARACTERS: Not very well developed, but who cares, Santa is killing mercs. Need I say more?

ACTING: Some really good performances, especially Beverly D’Angelo playing a bitch very well. John leguizamo is playing his best villain/gangster yet. The worse acting comes from Alex Hassell, whom emotes like a robot.

STYLE: Very beautiful. Nice use of color, crystal clear and clean.

DIALOGUE: Nothing cringe. Believable.

MUSIC: Forgettable.

CONCLUSION: For a movie that is Tim Allen’s Santa Clause mixed wit Die Hard, this really should not work. Plenty of fucked up Santa movies have been made. The 80s had Silent Night, Deadly Night, a Tales from the Crypt Episode and a movie called Christmas Evil, which I reviewed in 2019. The 90s didn’t have much in terms of bad Santa’s, other then Robo Santa from Futurama, but the 00’s did, with, you guessed it, Bad Santa. So a movie like this is relatively novel and it totally hits, even if it should not. I look forward to a sequel here.

3.5/5

Writing

Kageoween: Five Nights At Freddy’s Movie Review.

Leave a comment

INTRODUCTION: So I’ve never played the video games. I know very little about this series. My brother has played them and my sister played at least one, so that’s the extent of my knowledge of Five Nights At Freddy’s.I think that makes me the perfect guy to review this movie, since I have no vested interest in this franchise. So how was it?

PLOT: a security guard loses his mall job, to be hired to watch over a wish.com Chuckie Cheeses’, where there is more than just repurposed pizza to worry about.

CHARACTERS: Not bad. They took some care to develop the characters. I can’t say you care by the end, but you could be open to more of them in a sequel.

ACTING: Very good. No one is winning awards here, but they are all solid.

DIALOGUE: Good, nothing cringe

VISUALS: Excellent

FX: Very good.

MUSIC: Catchy, but not very memorable.

CONCLUSION: This movie does tension in a retro way and does it very well. Too bad the tension builds towards nothing of value in terms of scares. It’s hard to figure out the tone of the movie, given some times it’s comical, which I’m sure is unintentional, given the scene that produced it. Other times it seems like a family drama. It kinda lacks an identity and kinda success at both, whilst failing miserably. It’s not horrible, but it leaves more questions than answers. The big bad reveal fizzles like a scooby do ending. They don’t even really set up a sequel. Maybe I’m just to fuckin stupid to get what they are trying to achieve. The biggest takeaway was a couple of random Saw references. Maybe a sequel would do it justice.

2.5/5

Writing

Kageoween: The Thing, 1982, movie review.

Leave a comment

INTRODUCTION: As I stated in my previous review, 2023 seems to be the year of John Carpenter. Sadly, the same could not be said, 41 years earlier, when Mr. Carpenter released The Thing to cinemas. So how good is this movie?

PLOT: A group of scientists fight a Ailen. No, you’re it wrong, that is the plot to Ailen (1979) as well.

CHARACTERS: Not bad. I mean, the star studded cast makes up for weak character development. These dudes are basically hibernating alcoholics, that already seem depressed as fuck, making the “threat” seem like a mercy killing. A tad bit more, upbeat characters and some banter between them, that suggests they’re at least friendly would of been nice. Not in this film though.

ACTING: Excellent! They all do a great job here. Granted it isn’t award winning, but given the material they have to work with, the fact they did their job seriously and not typical b movie, phone it in, is excellent.

STYLE: John Carpenter at his best. The visuals are stunning and a nice tidbit, the blue lights, which unbeknownst to scientists back then, for preventing suicidal tendencies, adds an accidental layer of depth to these men’s plights and isolation they’ve going through, making this choice very ahead of the curve.

DIALOGUE: Good

PACING: Typical slow moving pacing, which is nice, but doesn’t give us enough to make use of it, as it tries to be face paced with the sequences we’re seeing, making it awkward as to if it’s supposed to be an action or a horror movie that adds tension.

FX: Excellent, especially given how old the movie is. They hold up exceptionally well. Minus the early moments of the movie showing the space craft.

CONCLUSION: This movie bombed at the box office and is one of John’s biggest laments. It’s not a bad movie though, I think it suffers due to coming too soon on the heels of Ailen. It’s basically the same movie, but starring Kurt Russell. It some ways, that makes it better, in other ways it suffers for it. Had this movie been made in the 90s, 20 years after Ailen, I think it would of been a smash hit, especially post Ailen Reserection, given that movie sucked by most people standards, except me, who liked it. Sadly for John, it came 3 years after the 70s classic and didn’t add much new to the genre. This movie could beat be summarized as Evil Dead /Ailen hybrid, so much in fact, that I’m shocked they never showed the necronimicon. Despite its flaws, like needing more details about the Ailen and its purpose for possession of humans and it’s weak ending, it is still a very good movie and one I prefer over Ailen.

3.5 out of 5

Writing

Kageoween: John Carpenter’s Suburban Screams, 2023, review

Leave a comment

INTRODUCTION: So JC at one point said something to the effect of “I put my hand out and there’s a pay check in it, I’m happy” well, who can blame him? I love having money in my hand as well, but this isn’t a pay day for an old movie getting a remake based on his characters, rather it’s a sale of his name to another true crime series, the world doesn’t need.

PLOT: Maybe real crime stories re-enacted by actors that even porn would reject for their horrible acting.

CHARACTERS: What characters? I think they’re supposed to be based on real people, but the episode never mentions the crime that this is covering.

ACTING: This makes pornography actors seem like Kate Winslet.

VISUALS: Dated, retro and not in a very good way.

FX: Mid card as fuck!

CONCLUSION: This show is one more in a genre that’s done to death, no pun intended. JC doesn’t have much to do with this show, except in name only. It’s fine if he wants to milk his name for all its worth, but a little bit of editorial discretion as to what your name is on, would be a nice touch. Much like John Carpenter, I too placed my hand out, only I didn’t get a pay check, I just got a headache.

1 out of 5 stars

Writing

Kageoween: The Fog, 1980, review

Leave a comment

INTRODUCTION: So my television decided this year should be dedicated to John Carpenter movies. I assume it has to do with his soon to be released Peacock Halloween anthology series. Anyways, I seen a majority of this man’s movies, but never reviewed them, so I’m doing so for Kageoween. The Fog has to have had the weirdest of pitch meetings ever attached to it, because I don’t know who in the blue hell could of say straight faced through it, Which seems fitting to say about most of John’s movies. Lame concepts turned into iconic movies. So what are my thoughts? Read on!

PLOT: The Fog is rolling in. People are trapped on this island or something, IDK! Ahhh! Scary/sarcasm

VISUALS: It was made in the 1980’s on what appears to be a $13 dollar budget. Not millions, but literally $13 dollars USD. Thankfully John had great people surrounding him and a knack for visual flair, which makes a movie that should look a lot no retro, seem like it still could of be released yesterday to capitalize on nostalgia with retro movies, instead of being limited to tacky styles due to actually being filmed in the decade that birthed those styles. Unlike Halloween, where bell bottom are seen, along with middle age men, running around in tweed jackets thinking those were excellent style choices. (Writers note, I tend to like tweed jackets.) The most dated thing in this movie is a shot of a captains cup, looking like a middle schooler’s first attempt at clay firing and shellacking. You know, the hard to wash cups that get filled with cracks from day one and still, for some reason, exist? While still not John at his best, visually, it definitely shows a director making better overall choices and about to hit his peak with style by the time he gets to The Thing.

ACTING: Mostly good, but Jamie Lee is at her worst acting ever and her character is basically worthless, making her dialogue to Tom Akins in the boat, the most meta dialogue ever, about how she is basically worthless.

CHARACTERS: Mostly good, albeit sparse character development. Compared to other movies of its time though, this is still pretty good.

FX: You get two FX styles in this. Ghouls and the fog. The only really bad FX shot is near the end as the fog, rolling over a crespecular bay, looks like it’s on par with the moon in Evil Dead, except instead of a box, it looks like the fog is moving sideways on top of the water, like those old kids toys, that pretended to be video games, but just featured a moving background with a plastic car on top of it. Except those toys were bigger eye sores.

DIALOGUE: Good. Nothing overwhelming cringe.

CONCLUSION: For a movie whose title misrepresents the entire premise is a pretty good movie. It even has some pretty intense and scary moments that got me, even. The scariest part, is the lack of Tom Atkins mustache. The story is mildly interesting and done very well, for what is really a “from beyond the grave” ghost movie. Albeit I’m not quite sure why it took the Ghost nearly a century to take revenge, but lack of plot details aside, it works, minus the weak resolution that leads to an awesome finale sequence that more than makes up for it. Still a great Halloween movie, that hold up, some 43 years later.

4 stars out of 5