You don't need to watch the first two films to understand the film (For I myself did watch these two but it faded in my memory like dust). They reset the movie to a new character, a new era, and a new direction. The filmmakers sought to bring a gritty, added realism into the film which the first two lacks (its a satire spoof, come on). What they bring us is a story of a troubled father on the verge of divorce and he was given the chance to prove himself as he became the new Cicakman.
**SPOILER ALERT** Click to read more...at your own willingness to be spoiled!
My expectations were low. To me its a cheap going in the trend kind of horror movie, such as Villa Nabila, then we have Puaka Balai Gombak. I enter the cinema with extreme distaste and biasness, and boy I was wrong.
The film caught me in the first 30 minutes, its suspenseful, thrilling, edgy, an interesting premise with an absolute NATURAL acting I've ever seen in a Malay movie.
The premise sets of a group known as Puaka X which does ghost hunting at supposedly abandoned places. It also sets a culture, which in this country we have a lot of paranormal ghost hunting team that eagers to explore abandoned places, and its competitive. Following the likes of nightcrawler I should say, it introduces a certain culture more than just a plain documentary film. Puaka X goes to various abandoned places until they receive an anonymous email inviting them to Balai Polis Gombak, and its there where it all goes wrong. The story is cliche but execution wise is good, forgivable.
The acting was superb, I got caught in seeing this movie it feels like a real documentary because it feels real, this was the one thing that made me latching throughout the film because it is convincing. The actors, unknown at the time, gave a good performance as a film crew with energetic dialogues.
The creepy factor was well done, its not exactly in your face jump scares, but they rely more on creepy subtle appearances. The subtlety gives a nice touch for the film that knows what its doing, its just right and not too forced.
The low point of this movie is only around the climax and end, where the crew are being attacked by real ghosts. You know where this is going, its like the blair witch project scenario that in the end the crew never survive. Whatsmore the CGI takes away the realism of the mockumentary. At this point, I forgive it because it has effort.
I applaud this film for giving a change of perspective of local films. This was my first in 2015. I never thought it was a mockumentary until I saw the actors alive and well. Give it a go, its worth it.
I'm sure many are disapppointed that the film divert from the earlier two films in terms of style, but then again, we're just covering the first part of the movie. I usually don't judge the movie on a single chapter but overalls. Distinctively, this movie is how audience reacted to Kill Bill Vol.2 after they've seen Kill Bill vol.1 .
Both are made from the same director, but differ in style. The first movie has alot of action while the second movie has less action, more on suspense. Now audience expectation is one thing, it’s full of shit. The expectation is what makes them in denial of rejecting reality. Now based on the book, the third one, its different than the first two books, that was driven by almost the same premise and formula. The third book is a counter to that. I got the gripes from audiences that the movie is less action and lack development. Audience attention span have evolved, growing shorter to the point appreciating the films deeper is lacking these days.
Now see, this film is a commentary. On what you ask? From my side, it’s a commentary of filmmaking. The first glance I see Katniss were placed in an empty room and had to act out, this reminds me of the trouble the actors have to act in an empty green screen and act out of imagination. Katniss's propaganda message from the result were too clean, unconvincing and unbleievable. But when Katniss were placed in the real situation, and danger, with a few cameraman capturing her struggle, her persona is seen better, its more real with a stronger message.
This is the allusion of actors acting in a real set. This is a commentary of filmmaking today, the dilemma. Filmmakers today utilizing cheap methods such as no set but green screen but the feeling doesn't get there, it wasn't as strong in a real set where actors can interact well within.
The flaws that I have with the movie is that... Wow, Katniss hair is always in TOP SHAPE PERFECT CONDITION. At every moment, every time she woke up, in a battlefield, IN A BUNKER. It feels so Hollywood-ish for them to spice things up to make sure the main actress is always good looking.
Aside to that, the rebels are quite of dumbasses. Every plan they made is suicidal, its like if they were to do an assault against these soldier guys with weapons, they will just execute a plan that guarantees 40% deaths because its not even safe-proof. Sacrifice? Well, I supposed you can think of a better plan not? Like not charging unto them and stealthily sneak and kill them?
Overall, well, half-of-all, its an interesting break upon the continuos premise and as an introductory of the whole thing. The film covers 1/3 of the bookm actually, but it sets up what is needed to happen in the upcoming film.
Horns is a 2013 American-Canadian dark fantasy thriller film directed by Alexandre Aja, based on Joe Hill's novel of the same name. Daniel Radcliffe stars as a man accused of the rape and murder of his girlfriend (Juno Temple) who uses his newly discovered paranormal abilities in his pursuit to uncover the real killer.
~ Wikipedia
Guest Review by Mehmed Hossein
Not many will agree with me but I find Horns enjoyable; it's a good movie. It is well-paced and has a progressive development. It's a mystery "question-and-answer" movie driven from point A to point B. In other words, the film is "formula-ic" that things are expected as so.
In my personal opinion, most movies that I've watched had gone through the same formula in films, which to me in my taste, are getting more stale. It's the same thing again and again, till I can't tell anymore whether it is good or bad. Either I'm bad at being judge of it, or perhaps I've seen too much to not care all about the small details.
Joe Hill, the son of Stephen King wrote the novel which the movie is based on. Well, I never read the book so I'll be judging it as a normal moviegoer seeing what's presented on screen.
The film has a great first two acts that pulls the viewers in, bringing the curiosity in the questioning phase and explaining mysteries as the story progresses. Unfortunately the Third act is a bit off. Act 3 is the moment Iggy embraces the demon character but he gets killed by the man who murdered his girlfriend. He's a devil, can't he just told the guy to kill himself or something? This is the part where he got himself killed, and he is inexplicably rises from the dead, alive, just because he shunned Christianity in the first place? Despite a downer Third Act, I ended up 'dumbing down' my brain to the end to enjoy the film.
Daniel Radcliffe's acting was impressive; acting as an American boy despite his British background, he managed to pull off the accent well and his range of emotions played greatly you can connect to his character.
Flaw-wise, I think the movie would work well better without the obvious VFX. Mainly of him being a burning devil at the end of the film. People would probably interpret the moment he pulls off the cross to become a devil is consider anti-Semitic.
If you think too hard you won't enjoy the movie. I as a movie-goer, I've dumbed down enough with low expectation and I'm quite pleased with what I've seen here.
One dark and stormy evening, Silvy decided to embark on a harrowing annoyed trip to e@Curve for a movie premier. The journey was as slow as a tortoise, filled with a multitude of curses and dark, stormy skies. But fortunately for her she had arrived to the destination with some extra time to spare (phew!). As to why it was an annoyed trip, well. Flash floods everywhere caused traffic to be practically on standstill almost everywhere on that day.
Okay so lame introduction aside, I was invited to attend a KRU Production movie premier: Dendam Orang M4ti. Sounds scary, doesn't it? To be frightfully honest, I don't think it is a scary movie per say, but more of a case of psychological instability. But let me take things slow before I take a step further :)
Before attending the movie premier, I had decided to run a quick search on the synopsis of this movie. This was what I discovered:
Produced by KRU Studios, this psycho thriller follows the story of Lena, who awakens from a coma with a shakey memory and various unanswered questions. Movie Release Date: 23 October 2014 Language: Malay Subtitle: Chinese / English Genre: Thriller Running Time: 81 minutes Director: Jason Chong Main Cast: Lisa Surihani, Fizz Fairuz, Miera Leyana
*****
For the heck of it, here's the movie ticket =P
Malaysian sweetheart, Lisa Surihan i, being interviewed after the movie
Press Conference in session
Fizz sharing his filming experience with the audience
The celebs, along with the row of 'zombies' for the night. Those zombies gave me a shock of my life when they started slithering in the movie hall during the movie and touched my arm. I think I both startled and amused the crowd with my ear-splitting scream LOL.
Okay, so that sounds pretty vague with a lot of possibilities of what's about to happen...right? Promising, but not so much for me. I'm not exactly the greatest fan when it comes to horror/thriller movies so for this movie review, I brought a friend along. Movie review will be done by him and not me (seeing that I kept my eyes closed ALMOST throughout the entire movie) but you'll see some of my comments interjecting his review in blue :) P/S: Friend's also into filming so his review is pretty much on the technical side.
