Tag: 0 out of 4

Fading of the Cries? Interesting title. I know nothing about it.

Alright, interesting cover. I guess. Maybe some action movie involving like, vampires or stuff. probably CGI dependent, and dumb plot, but hopefully it is interesting too?

Nope. Not at all.

This movie is a super low budget cheesy “scary movie” reminiscent of those SyFy original movies. Except even those have better acting than this one.

Here is a rough plot outline. Hallee Hirsh puts on a necklace. Town goes to shit. Gets saved by super emo dude with sword Jordan Matthews. The drones might be zombies? They want to kill humans at least, and have no eyes, but also run fast and look super blurry. Her mom (Elaine Hendrix from Romy and Michele’s High School Reunion) and sister have to just hide in the house confused.

There is also some flashbacks of some Michael dude (Thomas Ian Nicholas) finding a spell book and releasing evil power. He is the uncle of said main chick. And yeah, that is about it. Don’t want to spoil the lore…that I don’t necessarily understand well.

So, as expected, the acting is horrible. No one is believable. The whole movie has horrible special effects. Some of the “Creatures” just look disturbing. Which I guess is a plus for this type of movie. The ending may have had some twists in it, but they didn’t even have reactions to the twists. No one gave a damn about this movie, everything may have been done in one take.

Is she coming on to me?

They did show a transformation from human to weird zombie eye thing. Was pretty cheesy. This is one of those movies where I am mad that everyone didn’t die at the end. Also, in the parts where homeboy had to kill lots of zombies (as they ran into his twirling death sword, more or less) and in other zombie scenes, it seems as if they just loved making that “Gut Wrenching Scream and Fall Into Distance” noise. Just, pushing that button over and over again. It’s a noise also made famous for being in Aaahh!!! Real Monsters!

I am glad they are trying some new things. All good and fine. But coherentness would be a plus. On the plus side? This would be a perfect movie to get drunk to and make fun of with friends.

Here at Gorgon Reviews, we sometimes like to change up the review format. For instance, this review will basically be a question and answer format for the movie Chop Kick Panda.

Question 1: Is this just some poor man’s ripoff of Kung Fu Panda?

I dunno! I will let you be the judge. Here is the cover.

As you see it is very different. This Panda is not wearing Pants.

Question 2: So it is a CGI movie about a martial arts panda?

Well. Kinda. First off, despite the cover, it is not a CGI movie. The movie looks as if it was made on a flash animation program for some quick computer thing. Yet instead of a quick video thing it is a full movie (of 40 minutes in length).

The amount of the movie that is actually martial arts is hard to say. In this place, Serenity Falls, the Panda is a janitor who had some lessons at a dojo. For some reason he has a kid, who he tells he is the best thing ever to. Movie even begins with a weird self dialogue about how great and legendary he is (like KFP). In fact, he is so legendary, that even his legend is legendary. They say that about 4-5 times in the movie, which means about once every 8-10 minutes.

So yeah. Some tiger wants some special amulet in the dojo? And tries to get it during a sleepover thing there. And yeah. That is about it.

Question 3: Hmm. That sounds kind of lame. At least there is lots of cool fighting?

As far as I could tell when I watched it, there was about zero fighting. A lot of off screen fighting. A couple on screen jabs. And that was the movie.

Question 4: But…but…the title! It says — Wait. Chop Kick? What the fuck is a Chop Kick?

Good question. I assume it is similar to the Kick Punch, but more Asian.

And less robots!

OoohhhhhhOooohhHhOOHHHHH. (That is ghost noises).

A retelling of the classic Red Riding Hood tale. For some reason the advertises of this movie made sure everyone knew that the people who did this movie also did Twilight. Clearly setting itself up for a not so serious movie.

The story stars Amanda Seyfried, who can be great and sing, but neither of these things really happen in this movie. She lives in a village where it always is winter and near a dark forest (I assume). They used to be attacked by a werewolf, but it stopped when she was a kid. She fell in love with a woodcutter, but he is lame and an orphan. FLASHFORWARD TO NOW. She is being forced to marry some other cute boy, who is prestigious or something.

I will say that I could not tell the two guys apart. This lead to some confusing moments for me.

OH NO WEREWOLF ATTACK.

Or just giant CGI wolf.

He kills her older sister. Eventually they call in Gary Oldman to come and kill the wolf! Even though Saul from Battlestar Galactica (oh how he has fallen) thinks he killed it already.

Blah blah. Witchhunt in the village. People thinking its everyone else. Eventually it is revealed. It is dealt with. And then a different dumb ending.

Alright first of all, the entire village just seemed fake. Even if they were in the woods for real, everything just seemed like shitty CGI to me, even her damn hood. In terms of guessing who the wolf is, I had about two guesses. One was right. Hooray. But I didn’t care. I also found it ridiculous that after the reveal, the wolf was still killed (spoiler?). Like, don’t be a bitch Amanda.

ESPECIALLY if you compare that ending with what happened right after it. That makes it even more stupid.

I wasn’t even interested in the movie for that long. Gary Oldman’s character was even annoying. He mentioned like, four or five times that he had to kill his own wife because she would be a werewolf. That was about all he said. Where I come from, killing your wife isn’t celebrated or a reason to get to do what you want.

“Give me that sandwich sir. I killed my wife.”

But rawrrr. This movie wasn’t good. I haven’t given a 0 in awhile, because that means I am mad I wasted my time with the movie in addition to it being pretty bad. Oh well. This fits my bill.

This is my 100th review! Oh man, how time flies when you are watching movies. I saw this previewed on some other shitty movie and thought it had an interesting concept. It also starred Oscar Nunez, from The Office, Christian Slater, from real life, and Eva Longoria, from Desperate Housewives. Also with a small role was Carla from Scrubs.

So in this movie, some small hispanic town loses all of its men due to a war. All of them are drafted and sent off to fight, leaving only one man in the town, the priest Oscar. Women having to run a town by themselves? Hilarious! Just kidding. This movie banks heavily on gender stereotypes, if that wasnt obvious. All of the women didn’t think they could do it (except for Eva, and one wandering woman who joined them later).

Here are some plot lines: The priest feels it is his duty by God to impregnate everyone to repopulate with boys. Slater is a journalist hearing of this town and looking to make a story. Women learning to read and write and do things on their own. Women loving other women. Brothels going out of business (and it also included a weird song about touching their “happy place”).

And after the Brothels went, the economy collapsed.

The music is cheesy, the camera work is bad, and most of the acting (outside of Eva) is just one dimensional. I give 0 ratings to movies that make me mad that I watched them, so I will do this as well. Mostly because this comedy didnt make me laugh, and had potential to have a great actual story and seemed only to rely on the fact that women might make out with other women to sell it.

American Breakdown [Also this link. Because one has the stars, one does not. I guess to cover it up?] may be one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Physically even as well. First off, this film seems like it was filmed entirely on an unfocused camera. My eyes /hurt/ when I watched this movie.

Here is an extreme example of what I thought I was watching. Posting it here though makes me a dick. I apologize. But this movie really does suck, and awkward focusing throughout pissed me off.

Because a lot of it was unfocused, I ended up having to listen to most of the movie, or “barely” watch it. That is a big strike in terms of liking a movie, that is for sure.

In terms of storyline, it is made up of, 4 or 5 smaller stories. Supposedly real life stories from New York City or something. Real life must be right, because that shit was stupid. And boring. And some was clearly not real. The second story barely had words, which sucked, because understanding it was painful (I /had/ to watch). This has people like Steve Carell in it, and Tony Soprano. And Paris Hilton. And Paul Walker. But who cares? This film was horrible. Nothing was interesting (except /maybe/ the last story). I felt like this would definitely be one of the films being made fun of by Mystery Science Theater.

I am now taking applications for people to join me to make a Mystery Science Theater 4000. Must be robots.

0 out of 4.

In case you were curious why there was so many 50 Cent tags, I actually did a theme week of my movies. The theme being 50 Cent/Curtis Jackson. Remember. Watching Shitty Movies So You Don’t Have To.

From that theme it seemed like the movies got worse and worse the more of a role 50 Cent played. In Streets of Blood, he was the best part, but technically the lead man was Val Kilmer. In Gun their roles are reversed. 50 is in Charge, Val is his assistant.

I am not sure why they decided another movie was good after Streets Of Blood. Maybe they wanted less thinking, more killing. You’d expect a movie like Gun to be action packed. But this movie was pretty much the same thing. But less plot. Boring and mindless. In fact. The ending of this is kind of like the opposite of Streets Of Blood, in terms of which characters die and by who. Yes. That is definitely a spoiler. I don’t care, this movie blows.

It was also direct to DVD. I don’t know why. It should have all been put on the cutting room floor.

The tagline even references another bad movie of his. Good job 50.

0 out of 4.

Oooh. A movie set in the 70s or 80s and about skating? Cool. I hope it is like Roll Bounce. I love Roll Bounce!

So does Wayne Brady.

Now I knew by reading the cover it wouldn’t be like Roll Bounce. It is some coming of age story, also involving a skating rink (named Skateland). Alright. Gotcha.

But oh man was this movie boring. Outside of Brett Cullen, no other really known people are in it.

Not much happened in this movie. Unfortunately, it took a long for time to what happened to happen. Scenes were slow, the plot was slow, and the conversations were never exciting. The actors showed little emotion, and it kind of reminded me of an actual 70s movie in that regard. Just camera and scenes. The only thing I really noticed is that a lot of scenes were single camera shot. It meant no cuts and that the people actually had to remember their lines and not screw up. Good job guys. You should do theater.

Jeez. This movie has a lot of problems, which go way deeper than no more Anne Hathaway.

Of which this site is more than happy to fix.

It seems like it took all the parts I disliked from the first movie and turned it into this sequel. The first movie had the awesome interview scenes for 2/3 of the film, and some nice witty dialogue. The end, where they went all special agents to stop a squirrel? Pretty dumb. I laughed a bunch in the first one. This one had no laughter (minus the Troll scene).

The jokes fell flat, basing them almost all on stereotypes. The order of the old ladies or whatever wasn’t interesting. Cartoon old ladies never are. I didn’t want any Granny in this movie, but we got tons of Grannies. The first movie had a lot more of the woodcutter, and that is also why it excelled. The animation sort of reminded me of a video game the whole time I watched it and not in the good way. David Alan Grier as a troll made me laugh though.

But seriously. The ending of the film didn’t even make sense didn’t even make sense. No reason to think the rules of their universe/the snacks would work that way. That was dumb.

Why do they think Hayden Panettiere is a good replacement for Anne, I will never know. But at least Patrick Warburton, who does the wolf voice, still has an awesome voice. Probably the best part of the sequel (and the troll).

Pictured: Awesome (or Moss) the Troll.

0 out of 4.

This is the worst movie I have watched so far with these reviews. This just has to be a bad movie. Not a good kids movie and a bad movie, but a bad kids movie too. Besides its horrible title (Mars Needs Moms? What does that even mean?), the reason it failed box office wise has to be because it would only appeal to boys aged 9-12. No adults, and definitely no women would come out after watching this and feel more inspired, better, or different at all. Well, maybe they will be angry at that drivel. Unless they are cool with their roles being reduced solely to being housewives later on, whose value is determined by ability to get others to do chores.

By that logic, Freddy Mercury would make a good housewife.

What also bugged me was how creepy the humans looked. The voices seemed to not match at all the mouths how they were coming out, making them seem even more creepy. Especially with their dead eyes staring at me. Way too much uncanny valley.

Yes. THOSE dead eyes.

It is billed as starring Seth Green, and as I watched it I thought there is NO WAY that Seth Green is doing that voice. Thanks to quick research, it is determined that the creators didn’t like his voice either, so they changed it to an actual eleven year old kid. The movements/face are still based off of Seth Green, but not the important part, the voice. Guess what didn’t get changed? The credits. That just feels like false advertising. Thats some crap.

The sidekick character was annoying, and the plot horrible. Don’t watch this. Seriously. There is a reason it is one of the worst box office disasters ever. Don’t let them make any money back through DVD/Blu-Ray sales in order to not call it a compete flop.