Saw IV (2007)

Saw IV basically apitimises why i don't give grades. Much of my review style is less of me reviewing a movie, more of me ranting and trying to figure out just what i thought about it, a lot of which is discovered there and then during the writing process. Then i look back and hopefully it matches my true thoughts while be entertaining at the same time, shall we go for it? Let's go to work

I've made no attempt in the past to cover up my love for the saw series. Many people disagree but i find the saw franchise one of the most refreshing film series' to come out of the film industry in a long time, horror or otherwise. Saw 1 was a subtle yet daring film that really made you think. Saw 2 was yes, more mainstream, but still had the ability to craft a fantastic horror that kept you guessing. Saw III was possibly far fetched at times, but , was a nice way to finish the series with a great feeling of finality.......oh wait....damn.

So it's not over yet. Part of me is happy, part of me has Nightmare on elm street 300000 running in my mind. Anyway, last year (when i was in my full Saw loving mode) i really wanted to see Saw III at the cinema, but didn't. So Saw IV was my first experience of Saw in the cinema. and i was hyped, was it mis-placed?

yes and no. There is deffinatly a sense that the traps may have gone too far, both in their quantity and lack of qaulity. Lets face it, the majority of Saw fans just wanna see the traps, a sad fact, but hey, it has its..."charm". One of the films highlights was a solid performance from Lyriq Bent, who returned as Rigg, a SWAT team member, once a supporting player, now on centre stage. I felt he carried that responsiblity very welll. The film opens fairly well with an autopsy , but the whole first tape being found thing was a bit over the top. Plus, with the whole tape system you REALLY REALLY REALLY have to suspend your disbelief, which, at parts in this film, takes a LOT of suspending. This factor alone can take away from the films overall effect, and i guess, more than any of the others, this factor was present. For Example it all relies on the person following these instructions, what if he / she would of just got home and thron the tape in the bin!!? well, we wouldn't have much of a film i guess. Some acting was a bit off, but that i guess you have to expect from horrors (but should you have to ?). It at times plays like this - Trap - Trap - Trap - Trap - Tape - Trap - Tape - Trap - Jigsaw doll turns up - Trap ect. ect. However though this plotline can get tiresome, i felt the majority of the victims were interesting enough to warrant there inclusion. Especially one of which, who has a connection to John (Saw / Jigsaw) before he starts on his ways and is the reason he started his "Games" (and is the victim of his first ever "game") Some of the backstory and flashbacks were actually pretty engaging, and helped to tell a lot about John's past life and what makes him do his work.

I also liked the way Rigg was being used, the traps and choices set for Rigg being used as a way to try and teach him john's way of thinking, which i thought was a nice touch. However, its just a new way of coating the same idea but giving it a lsightly new twist i guess. I found the payoff very disapointing, i'll let you make your mind up about that, but given the payoff in the first two (II especially) this fell so short......(WHO WAS THAT GUY!? I DON'T CARE...DAMN) just love in jokes, don't ya?. As for the traps and violence, the traps were ok, very gruesome, and look-away worthy thats for sure. What i didn't like was the way the film finished it gave a sense that this could go on forever, due to the bounderies (or lack of) of the story and narrative formation. A great performance from Tobin Bell as usual and for sure has to go down as one of the best horror villians by now.

All in all, I'd say, i was all in all, impressed. By that i mean it managed to be interesting enough, to keep my interest. However, there are some moments that make it by far the weakest Saw film, the payoff i thought was laughable, over use of same ideas, some of the traps, some of the characters. However, some of the apsects, makes it one of the better saw films. Tobin Bell fantastic, backstory to his character done better than in any of the other movies, character of Rigg and his overall task and choice. As i say this film has split my opinion and i'll wait for the DVD for a rewatch. What i can say though is, its better than i thought it would be, theres enough backstory there to keep it interesting, but at same time, theres enough bad acting, unoriginality and one lame ass payoff to make it a bad viewing experience.....

sorry Thats really the best i can do lol .... (rewatch time!)

Jackie Brown (1997)

After bursting onto the scene with almost post modern and deffinalty daring, Reservoir dogs, in 1992, Quentin Tarantino established himself as a serious player in modern american cinema. Then 2 years later he released what i consider to still be his best work, Pulp Fiction. Much like dogs, its fragmented timeline, violence, dialogue and direction proved that Dogs wasn't a fluke. It would be Christmas day 1997 when Tarantino would release his next film, Jackie Brown.

Jackie Brown, adapted from novel, Rum Punch by Elmore Leonard, seemed on odd choice for his next project. Tarantino had made a name for himself with his writting and the decision to work on a project written by some one else was a suprise. However, he found a way to balence Elmore's work with his own imput, in what turns out to be one of tarantino's most solid films.

By solid i mean, unlike Reservoir Dogs and Pulp Fiction before it, which could be argued they were more style of substance, Jackie Brown derives its strength from its characters and lets them tell the story. With a great cast top to bottom including Samuel L Jackson, Pam Grier, Robert De Niro, Robert Forster, Michael Keaton and Bridget Fonda. Also more so than his previous films, its the subtleties within the characters that sells them. Whether its Fonda's laid back performance as sufer chick Melanie, or Robert De Niro playing a man who is released from prison, slowly getting used to life outside again. Another stand out performance coems from Michael Keaton, who shines in this. Samuel L Jackson is of course great, in possibly his most evil role. The soundtrack is also a key factor of this movie with blues and soul tracks adding alot of depth to the film.

It's narrative is far more linear than QT other films, telling the story for the most part in order. Some complained about this, and yes i can see where they are comming from, once a director, an autuer one such as Tarantino goes against his usual style, it may come as a shock . However if you are worried about this i ask you to try and ignore that and watch it for the great character study it is.

All in all, this is a fantastic work, though maybe not as daring or loud as his other films, its a subtle, well made movie that is a great lesson in story telling.

Death Proof (2007)

Any Quentin Tarantino movie sparks my interest. The news that he was working with Robert Rodriguez (From Dusk Till Dawn / Sin City) to create a double feature Grindhouse presentation was great news. Sadly due to under performing in US box office terms, the film was split from 2 movies back to back to two movies released on their own. I was very disappointed i wasn't going to get to see the Grindhouse experience. Slightly let down i still had high hopes for the experience of seeing a QT film in the cinema

Quentin Tarantino's homage to the grindhouse comes in form of Death Proof, and to be honest, its a mixed bag. Their is a sense of originality and style that always comes across in QT's work that cannot be denied and its no different here. Kurt Russell delivers a cool, calm, collected performance as Stunt Man Mike. Played with a slight self awareness of its core material (being a little over the top lets be honest) it adds a extra level to the film. The scene where he picks up his first victim, pam is very creepy and well pulled off. Its scary enough and provides some genuine shocks. This film is basically split into two parts following travels of 2 sets of women and their run-ins with Stunt Man Mike. Personally i found the first half much more compelling. Arlene, Shanna and Julia i felt i was more interested in their characters than the second group. With hints of Arlene's insecurity, Julia false confidence and Shana's fun loving attiude porvided some of the better wirtting in this film in terms of actual character development. Even a small moment in which julia calls pam "a skinny little bitch" even without knowing her as she's sitting at the bar, and arlene obivious jealousy when she sees pam talking to mike, adds a level of character to the film, an almost high school popular girls against the unpopular girl thing going on. The second group, consists of women who work within film (a character plot i found pretty smug) . Character development came here in form of pretty pointless stories told by the group about their past rather than any actual emotional level within them.

The second half however does contain the big car chase set piece, which is as people say, very engaging and thrilling. The cinetography is fantastic and keeps you on the edge of your seat, however i can't help but feel if i cared a bit more about the characters, i'd be a little more near the edge of my seat than i was. The character twist near the end was very well excuted and added greatly to the enjoyment of the overall film. I was suprised how well Quentin Tarantino took to the action / horror genre especially during the chase scenes as they are brilliantly directed.

However in the bounderies of Grindhouse this film can't help but fall short. Having seen Planet Terror recently i can say that this, well, its really a Grindhouse film. Planet terror went balls out (quite literally in parts.) on the grindhouse style. With not only dirt and burn effects but the overall picture looked tired and warn. However Death Proof was WAY too polished and at times felt like he forgot what tthis film was meant to be. it was like "damn i better throw in a slight line in the picture there" because rest of it is crisp clear with even stylistic black and white effects follwed by super bright colour. Bit of a let down when you think of Grindhouse style it was meant to be.

All in All there is a level of qaulity that cannot be denied, Kurt Russell is fantastic, as is the first group of ladies. The chase scenes are as thrilling as it gets and there are moments of shock and engaging characters. However, it does become wordy, it at times descends into a big "in joke". I wish QT had let go a little in terms of his film making and went along with grindhouse a little more (The entire second half is picture perfect..what?! ) . I do recommend, but not as much as i would of hoped. However, the fact that it lets down on the grindhouse style and that i feel QT just ended up making another QT movie, it's still a engaging watch for the most part and up there with the better films of this year