DOWNLOAD MOVIES ONLINE

Categories

Archives

Blogroll



eXTReMe Tracker

I Am Legend movie

I Am Legend, the third cinematic adaptation of Richard Matheson’s novel, has been in development for a very long time. Originally slated to star Arnold Schwarzenegger and be directed by Ridley Scott, this movie has kicked around for so long that by the time it has finally reached the screen, Schwarzenegger is out of the business altogether and the director is someone whose career in music videos hadn’t even started when Michael Bay was being touted as possible replacement for Scott. Nevertheless, all these years later, we finally have this new version of I Am Legend, starring Will Smith as the Last Man on Earth and directed by Francis Lawrence (Constantine).

I suppose it’s a common fantasy - believing that you’re alone on the planet. The reality, if it ever happened, would be more the stuff of nightmares. When Matheson wrote I Am Legend; from which this movie takes its name, its main character, and certain events and themes; he was interested in exploring the hard aspects of what this kind of existence might really mean. Loneliness can drive a person slowly insane even if they guard against it. That lies at the core of I Am Legend - the psychological torment endured by the protagonist. That, and the vampires.

Matheson’s book has often been credited as the “inspiration” for many of the modern-day zombie movies; his “vampires” have a kinship with George A. Romero’s dead. Cinematically, the creatures of this film most evidently echo (perhaps because of the circumstances) those in Danny Boyle’s 28 Days Later. In fact, there are numerous similarities between that movie and I Am Legend, not the least of which is that both feature a scenario in which an apocalypse occurs because of a disease and those who don’t die turn into slavering, raving monsters.

I Am Legend opens in 2012 New York City - the most deserted place on Earth. Kudos to the special effects wizards for using computers to so effectively depopulate the city. It’s eerie watching such emptiness. New York has a human population of one: Dr. Robert Neville (Will Smith), an ex-military scientist who was to some degree culpable for what happened to his race. The disease was initially hyped as a cure for cancer (by Emma Thompson in an unbilled cameo) but it mutated and became a killer. The creatures it transforms can’t emerge in the sunlight, so they stay hidden during the day only to come out and seek fresh blood between dusk and dawn. In that period, Robert and his faithful dog, Sam, are padlocked within his apartment. They hunt by day and hide by night.

Robert is lonely and his loneliness is eroding his sanity. He talks to Sam as if she was a human. He speaks to department store mannequins he has dressed in clothing. He rents DVDs of old news shows not so much so he can revisit the past but so he can hear human voices and pretend he’s not alone. In many ways, it’s how Tom Hanks survived in Cast Away - by making a volleyball, Wilson, his best friend. Robert has set a broadcast to shout out his location on every station on the AM dial, but so far, no one has come looking. He uses a private lab in his apartment to continue research on the disease, always searching for the elusive cure. If he could save one vampire - turn it back into a human - he would no longer be alone. Ghosts of his past haunt his dreams, and it’s through those tortured flashbacks that we gain some knowledge of what the last hours were like for our kind.

The first two-thirds of I Am Legend are superior to the fast-paced, action-oriented final 35 minutes. There’s a key event that occurs just past the hour mark and, after that, the movie feels more like a typical Hollywood adventure than the introspective, thought-provoking production that graces the screens for the first 65 minutes. The ending, while not a complete cop-out, diverges from that of Matheson’s book and feels a little too convenient and facile. For most of the movie, character drives plot. The closer we get to the conclusion, the more plot drives character.

There are some top-notch action sequences, such as one in which vampires and vampire dogs attack Sam and an injured Robert. There’s also another scene in which Robert tries to take out an entire cell of vampires with nothing more than a speeding vehicle. There are some missteps - the deer chase is dumb and marred by CGI deer that look CGI. And the climactic struggle is less exciting than it should be. There’s a sense that some of the action was inserted into the movie to keep from losing the attention of younger viewers. It’s okay for the movie to deal with intelligent ideas as long as there are enough bangs to enliven the proceedings.

As Tom Hanks did in Cast Away, Will Smith pulls off this half-insane role perfectly. Of course, in addition to being alone, Robert has other crosses to bear. He is hunted by the living dead. He carries a weight of guilt. And he knows, on one level or another, that he is responsible for what happened to his wife and daughter. Smith nails the portrayal. It’s not the kind of work that will earn him an Oscar nomination but audiences usually don’t see better than this in genre films.

Science fiction fans hoping for a faithful adaptation of Matheson’s novel will be disappointed. This is no more a visitation of the source material than its predecessors, The Last Man on Earth or The Omega Man, were. The updates are timely - the movie makes the suspension of disbelief curve as easy to ascend as it was in Children of Men. For me, the most engaging aspects of the movie are connecting with Robert and understanding how he uses routine to survive each day. It’s seeing the empty New York and understanding how its desolation offers both solace and pain. For the most part, the action sequences work - and they are directed in a straightforward manner that thankfully does not rely on fast cuts and shaky camera movement - but they are not the real reason to see this movie. Cautionary tale though it might be, I Am Legend offers a window into a future that probably won’t be but that is easily believed within the context of this workmanlike motion picture.

Click here to watch movie trailer or download movie now


Howling movie

Of all the werewolf movies made in the 80s, few are worth watching. However, a few classic do exist, and most horror fans agree that “The Howling” is one of them. While not quite as accomplished as An American Werewolf in London, “The Howling” was received well enough to spawn a long running series and start a short-lived werewolf fad-which is probably how a movie as abnormal as An American Werewolf in London found funding.

Like many aspects of the film, the plot feels a bit dated. After an encounter with a serial killer, newswoman Karen White is sent to “the Colony” by her psychiatrist. The Colony is a sort of hippie commune where patients are sent for seminars and natural solutions for their problems. Of course, the Colony is really a front for a clan of werewolves, who quickly turn Karen’s husband into one of their own.

Yes, the plot is silly, and the special effects haven’t held up much better. But despite its age, “The Howling” is still one of the better werewolf films out there. While the werewolves look a bit “muppetesque” today, at the time they were top notch. The design of the creatures is unique, mixing elements of wolf and man more equally than most other werewolf films. But what works the best about “The Howling” is the mood. With a somber, hopeless feel straight out of “Taxi Driver” and a great ending, the film’s atmosphere far overshadows the thin plot and dated effects. Everyone involved with the making of the film treats it very seriously, from director Joe Dante and writer John Sayles to the cast and effects artists. This serious, straight-faced attitude is what made the movie work; a lot of hard work was put into creating a moody, frightening film. Although the film may have lost some of its bite over the years, it will always remain one of the most respected werewolf films ever.

 Click here to watch movie trailer or download movie now


How the Grinch Stole Christmas movie

For more than three decades, How the Grinch Stole Christmas has been a holiday season television staple. The 22-minute cartoon, based on the book by Dr. Seuss and narrated by Boris Karloff, has enchanted multiple generations of children (not to mention adults), and, even with its ready availability on video, it still draws a sizable viewing audience every time it is broadcast. With the possible exception of the Peanuts Christmas Special, no other seasonal program is as beloved and respected as this venerable classic. So, in deciding to transform it into a 90-minute, live action motion picture, director Ron Howard has taken a sizable risk. There are undoubtedly those who will view the movie as a sacrilege of the most heinous kind.

To Howard’s credit, he has worked hard to keep the spirit of the animated Grinch intact. The text of the Dr. Seuss book is in place, although a great deal has been added to pad out the running time. In addition, the songs from the TV show have also been incorporated into the film, although the movie version of “You’re a Mean One, Mr. Grinch” could have used a little less livening up (the simple rendition in the cartoon is preferable). The bright, colorful set design impresses, effectively translating the happy hamlet of Whoville from the cartoon world to the fantasy-reality one. Of course, one might legitimately ask why, if so much attention was being paid to replicating the animated look and feel in a live action medium, this movie was deemed necessary in the first place. The answer, of course, is money - How the Grinch Stole Christmas is likely to make a lot of it. That doesn’t mean it’s a bad film - in fact, it’s quite entertaining - but commercial, not creative or artistic, considerations have brought it to the screen.

The movie opens with nearly one hour of background material about the Grinch and Whoville that was not in either Seuss’ book or the TV special. We learn all sorts of interesting tidbits designed to fill in supposed “holes” in Grinch lore (not that anyone really noticed). We come to understand why the Grinch hates Christmas (it has more to do with bad childhood experiences than with a heart that’s two sizes too small), why he has it in for the Mayor of Whoville, and why Little Cindy Lou-Who finds his soft spot so easily. Finally, at about the film’s two-thirds point, the narrative switches over to following the book letter-for-letter, and we get a strikingly faithful re-creation of the cartoon. There is a difference in tone between the two portions of the film - the part that follows the book is smoother, has considerably more narration, and consistently rhymes, while the remainder has a “tacked on” feel. Children, however, won’t notice, and the shift isn’t glaring enough that it will bother most adults - even those who have sat through the TV special countless times.

Of course, How the Grinch Stole Christmas‘ big selling point isn’t nostalgia or great production values - it’s Jim Carrey. Buried beneath Rick Baker’s flexible makeup, he’s a dead ringer for the cartoon creature, but, although he isn’t physically recognizable, there’s no doubt who’s under all of the green latex and hair. Recently, Carrey has been working on developing a reputation as a serious actor, but, in concert with Me, Myself & Irene, How the Grinch Stole Christmas allows him to get back to the kind of antics that made him famous in the first place. His off-the-wall performance is reminiscent of what he accomplished in The Mask, except that here he never allows the special effects to upstage him. Carrey’s Grinch is a combination of Seuss’ creation and Carrey’s personality, with a voice that sounds far more like a weird amalgamation of Sean Connery and Jim Backus (Bond meets Magoo!) than it does Karloff.

The character to benefit the most from the fattened script is Little Cindy Lou-Who, played by charming newcomer Taylor Momsen. Cindy becomes the Grinch’s advocate in Whoville, the only one who sees the goodness buried deep within. Like the three ghosts in Charles Dickens’ A Christmas Carol, she represents the catalyst that transforms the cold-hearted Grinch from a Scrooge into the holiday’s biggest advocate and most devout celebrant. Momsen is wonderful in the part; she manages to be cute without being insufferable - a difficult task for a young actress who probably got the job because she was more adorable than the other would-bes vying for the role.

Aside from Carrey and Momsen, the other actors don’t leave an impression. Jeffrey Tambor plays the Mayor of Whoville, a man whose grudge against the Grinch goes back to when they were both eight years old. Christine Baranski is the woman who has had a secret crush on the Grinch since before his self-imposed exile to Mount Crumpet. And Molly Shannon and Bill Irwin play Little Cindy’s parents. The narration is spoken by Anthony Hopkins, who uses his rich voice to set a non-threatening tone. How the Grinch Stole Christmas is a fable; it is designed to be funny and uplifting but never scary, no matter how frightening the title character might believe himself to be.

Putting aside the question of whether the movie is necessary in the overall scheme of things, How the Grinch Stole Christmas represents a solid hour and a half of genuine family entertainment. Unlike most live action movies making a similar claim, there is no toilet humor (apparently, Dr. Seuss’ widow had something to do with that), making this a refreshingly “clean” comedy. For Carrey, whose caged energy is released, this falls just short of a tour de force. Last year, he became Andy Kaufman; this year, it’s the Grinch. He brings animation to the live action, and, surrounded by glittering, fantastical sets and computer-spun special effects, Carrey enables Ron Howard’s version of the classic story to come across as more of a welcome endeavor than a pointless re-tread.

 Click here to watch movie trailer or download movie now


The Hudsucker Proxy movie

When writing a review column that focuses on telling people, especially parents, what elements in a current movie may have positive or negative effects on their children, you are often hard pressed to fit a movie like The Hudsucker Proxy into a category at all. Yet it attempts to tell a story that might have some attraction for teens, but will be as boring as watching grass grow for the under 12 group.

This is a movie based on many of the popular screwball comedies that originated in the 1930’s. A “screwball comedy” is packed full of wisecracking dialogue, frenzied action, and usually has opulent sets and production design to make up the effect. Ethan and Joel Coen, the two young brothers that produced and directed this movie, thrive on recreating earlier film styles into new titles.

Hudsucker tells the fictitious tale of the invention of the Hula-Hoop by a bright young mailroom clerk that works for a monstrous bureaucracy of which we are not sure what they produce. Two people wind up jumping out of windows in this film, but otherwise there is not much violence, little sexual content (a passionate kiss, and a short dream sequence where a girl dances around in a black item of some sort), and a few mild profanities. There also isn’t much plot, story, or any other reasons to take two hours to watch this movie.

What Hudsucker Proxy does have is stunning visual sets, all based on a 1930’s Art Deco style. As wonderful as the images are, after thirty minutes, they become boring and you start yearning for more story and less stupidity. The video box says the movie follows a Frank Capra style. Capra was known for movies that had a strong overall message. I kept waiting for the message in Hudsucker, and I’m still waiting. Overall, The Hudsucker Proxy provides a quick feast for the eyes and a famine for the brain.

Click here to watch movie trailer or download movie now


Hook movie

Playing a seven-inch Tinkerbell with pixie wings and pointy ears, Julia Roberts reminds the grown Peter Pan (Robin Williams) that the trick to flying is thinking happy thoughts. You get the feeling that the high-priced talents involved in Hook, including Dustin Hoffman in the villainous title role, are thinking profit participation. In updating Peter Pan for the Nineties, Steven Spielberg front-loads this $80 million epic with big stars, big sets and really big special effects (even Captain Hook’s croc nemesis is humongous). The film has been engineered for merchandising potential and the widest possible appeal — note the conspicuously multiethnic Lost Boys. What’s missing is the one thing that really counts: charm.

Spielberg triumphed with E.T. and Close Encounters of the Third Kind because he gave the characters in those classic fantasies room to insinuate themselves. In Hook he takes an insistent tone more appropriate to an Indiana Jones adventure than to the J.M. Barrie fable about the fear of growing up. You leave Hook feeling mauled, which may be dandy for those who see movies as the next best thing to theme parks. Though the film occasionally hints that the story is a Freudian hallucination, those moments merely suggest the witty spectacle that might have been if Spielberg had guarded his vision as diligently as his investment.

Peter Banning (Williams) is a workaholic with a trendily dysfunctional family. His wife, Moira (Caroline Goodall), and children — eleven-year-old Jack (Charlie Korsmo) and seven-year-old Maggie (Amber Scott) — take a back seat to his real-estate deals. Peter would rather cuddle his phone than his kids. Resentful Jack draws a plane crashing, providing parachutes for everyone but his father.

“Peter, you’ve become a pirate,” says Granny Wendy (Maggie Smith, luminous even behind layers of old-age makeup) when Peter and family visit her in London. The past is a blank for Peter; he has forgotten that when he was twelve, he decided to stay with Wendy, who then placed him with American parents. He doesn’t know that he’s the Pan whom Barrie had immortalized and Wendy had loved. Wendy tells him the truth after Hook kidnaps Jack and Maggie from Wendy’s house. With Tink sprinkling the pixie dust, Peter flies to Neverland to find his kids, defeat Hook and recover the child within himself.

Williams is a hoot — though out of character — when he leers at Tink (”You’re a teeny thing, lovely legs though”) and disses the Lost Boys (”What’s this, a Lord of the Flies preschool?”). But Spielberg keeps crowding him into sentimental corners. He’s another selfish yuppie who learns to care. You could have titled his story Regarding Peter.

Hoffman dodges the weepie trap, but then he has his own writer (it’s the latest in star perks). Not content with the James V. Hart script, he brought in Malia Scotch Marmo (Once Around) to develop the Hook character. Sporting a British accent and a Bill Buckley hauteur, Hoffman’s Hook plots the “ultimate revenge” — making Peter’s kids love him as a father. Aided by his first mate, Smee (Bob Hoskins), Hook organizes baseball games and other activities for Jack. Little Maggie, like all the women in the film, is introduced only to be ignored. Though Roberts does her best playing a flickering special effect, she’s given so little to do that she could be accused of loitering.

Meanwhile, Williams dons Mary Martin drag and flies around Neverland trying to recapture his lost youth. It’s a lovely sequence, expertly shot by Dean Cundey (Who Framed Roger Rabbit). Showing the allure of Neverland to stressed-out adults should be a natural for Spielberg. Instead, he buries the conflict between freedom and responsibility in the clutter of food fights and clanking duels. Maybe Spielberg thought he had to justify the expense of the Neverland set and Hook’s warship. With John Williams’s score as relentless backup, Spielberg delivers action but no momentum. What’s exciting at first grows numbing with repetition.

At the climax, Spielberg tries to regain his footing with tear-jerking tactics, especially the gratuitous murder of a child. When Tink tells Peter he’ll always be in her heart, “in that place between asleep and awake,” it’s Spielberg’s wishful thinking. No matter how much cash Hook earns, it will take more than pixie dust to fly this overstuffed package into our dreams.

Click here to watch movie trailer or download movie now


Highlander movie

The good versus evil theme must be the most overdone theme in movies besides maybe love conquers all. The best you can hope for in a movie that uses one of these themes is for the presentation to be original. Highlander’s plot is one of the most original ever filmed.

It tells the story of a group of immortals battling to the death, until there is only one left alive. This one will win ‘the prize’. The prize being the power of all the other immortals combined.

The plot centers on Conner McLeod, an immortal born in the highlands of Scotland during the 15th century. He is ‘killed’ during a battle with another clan and driven from his village when he mysteriously recovers. After a few years, another immortal, Juan Rameriz (played by Sean Connery) trains him to fight and teaches him the rules of fighting other immortals. The war between the immortals continues through the centuries, until the final battle in modern day New York where the bulk of the film takes place.

Director Russell Mulcahey, known until this point for his music videos, does a tremendous job on this film. His transition shots between modern day and the historical flashbacks are both original and ingenious. His directing, the action, and the soundtrack by Queen, keeps this movie flying along.

Although Christopher Lambert is the star, Clancy Brown nearly steals the movie as the evil immortal, Victor Kruger. His towering presence is truly menacing as he gleefully terrorizes Conner through the streets of New York.

The movies only weakness is the love story between Conner and Brenda. It seems contrived. Tacked onto the plot, it provides a female character and a gratuitous sex scene.

Highlander is a highly original, in concept at least, movie with an over the top villain, incredible visuals, and a soundtrack by one of the best rock bands ever. If only they could come up with a decent sequel.

Click here to watch movie trailer or download movie now


Hellbound- Hellraiser II movie

With Clive Barker, you get blood. Lots and lots of blood. The Technicolor equivalent of Sensurround in blood.

In “Hellbound: Hellraiser II,” not only does the blood flow copiously, but several of the main characters are skinless, which means their bodies are all slick bloody sinew, as if those classic medical encyclopedia illustrations had come to life. In fact, it’s death itself that comes to life in “Hellbound,” a sequel to the Barker-written and -directed “Hellraiser.” Unfortunately, while Barker is listed as executive producer, it’s only his characters and concepts that live on via writer Peter Atkins and director Tony Randel, who makes a determined bid for the “I Can Outdo Ken Russell’s ‘Lair of the White Worm’ Award.”

“Hellbound” is a film of many excesses — beyond the blood, there’s the heightened sound of pain, some bizarre sexuality and a slew of sadistic effects. Barker’s original conception was intriguing: an ornate puzzle box serves as a passage into an underworld (the Outer Darkness) where the thin line between pleasure and pain is constantly being tested both by weak-willed humans who fall under the box’s power and its citizen Cenobites, ghastly demons who embody, in extremely visual ways, all their realized perversions.

If you missed the original “Hellraiser,” it’s briefly recapitulated halfway through “Hellbound.” Its lone surviving human, the teen-age Kirsty (Ashley Laurence), is stuck in a Bedlam-style asylum, trying to figure out how her father, uncle and stepmother ended up dead, and then not dead, and maybe dead again (apparently only taxes are certain these days). The head psychiatrist, the sinister Dr. Channard (Kenneth Cranham), turns out to be something of a head case himself, one with a longtime desire to get to the other side. By manipulating Kirsty and the bloody mattress from hell that contains the evil spirit of stepmom Julia (Clare Higgins, also back from the first “Hellraiser”), the Doc unleashes assorted demons and brings Julia back to life again, feeding her the skin and blood of assorted patients kept in the basement of the asylum.

There are other characters — the mute Tiffany (Imogen Boorman), whose gift is puzzle solving; a medical assistant who learns too much, too late — and there are some unnecessary digressions, but when it finally gets on track about halfway through, “Hellbound” starts to pack some visceral punches. Even if you discount the cliche’s, there are enough bizarre and shocking effects here to satisfy all but the most demanding genre fans.

This is definitely not a film for the squeamish; besides the blood, there is much pain and nastiness as folks explore “the suffering, the sweet suffering.”

“Hellbound’s” most striking character, Pinhead (Doug Bradley), is back, looking like an acupuncturist’s cushion and leading his truly bizarre minions through their paces (is it just me, or does one of them look like quarterback Jim McMahon?). Later, when Channard himself is turned into a Cenobite, he starts using Freddie Krueger’s gag writer (”you have your whole lives behind you now”), but visually, he’s a disgusting fright and twice as nasty to boot.

The effects are generally good, and those Cenobites are definitely not the kind of folks you’d have over on New Year’s Eve. Still, it’s odd that the most intriguing, and threatening, items in the film are those darn puzzle boxes.

“Hellbound: Hellraiser II” is rated R and contains much graphic violence and bloodletting.

 Click here to watch movie trailer or download movie now