Toggle sidebar

Last Seen Movie

  • Thread starter Thread starter JuanMena
  • Start date Start date
  • Views Views 220,743
  • Replies Replies 1,437
  • Likes Likes 5
After Earth - Yet another dud by M. Night Shyamalan, who I believe never reached the heights of The Sixth Sense. What makes this stand out is that Shyamalan didn't have much creative control of the film, and he would later disown it. Will Smith is the main culprit, credited for the story, but definitely had a bigger hand. I felt that as I watched the movie, it was meant to be a vehicle for his son, but one where he's still a badass and unaccountable. There's hardly any pushback for his overly strict ways as a father, and his talk about fear is so preachy. Considering that Will Smith has some attachment to Scientology, or at least Dianetics, anti-fear talk reads like new-age religious bullshit mixed with motivational talk from the likes of Arnold Schwarzenegger. When told by someone who isn't emoting like Will Smith, the speech falls flat. Will Smith had a soul patch in this movie. I think that bit of hair was a prison for Smith's soul. The guy was mostly emotionless, with the only exceptions being lame streams of tears and maybe slight anger. That alone sinks the movie. Will Smith's greatest asset is his charisma, his energy. When that's gone, his presence is a complete waste of time. While Will Smith would later regret After Earth and taking accountability for Jaden Smith's involvement, it doesn't make his son's acting any less awful. As the boy grew up, Jayden's innocence and bubbly personality dissolved. He had something in The Pursuit of Happyness, and that's not in After Earth at all. Half the time, he's as boring as Will Smith. The other half, he's trying to emote, and it comes off as forced and annoying. It also sounded like the Smiths were going for some accent. It sounded a little British, but sometimes, there was no accent present. So what was the point?

According to IMDB trivia, Shyamalan was primarily in charge of the blocking and the visual aspects of the film. So he does deserve some blame. This movie is just ugly. The CGI was really poor. The lighting on Jaden Smith clashed with the VFX to the point where you can clearly tell he's not in the location. This ruins the effectiveness of the on-location shooting. The forest parts felt the most real. When they got to the giant eagle's nest and the volcano in the climax, the fakeness really took over. Some of Shyamalan does poke through the Will Smith miasma. A few camera shots were definitely Shyamalan, such as when Jaden Smith was in the center of the frame and almost looking directly into the camera. I think there was even a 4th wall break before the ship was destroyed. The unnecessary jump scare at the end of the Jaden Smith dream sequence was 100% Shyamalan. He's credited as a co-writer, and I think that shows with the drab dialogue, monotone delivery, and the really awkward attempts at dry humor. So while this movie isn't completely the fault of Shyamalan, he is not blameless. As a director, he failed to elevate the movie. He couldn't make chicken salad out of chicken shit. Will Smith does deserve more blame.

Man, 101 minutes, but the movie felt like it was over 2 hours. This was so damn slow. The action sequences were not exciting at all, often looking bad because of the CGI. I was surprised to see that Chad Stahelski, director of the John Wick films, was the stunt coordinator and 2nd unit director. I couldn't really feel the quality of his work because the movie sucked. I was also surprised to see Zoe Kravitz in this. She only appeared in flashbacks and that ridiculous dream sequence. There wasn't really anything that was "so bad it's good." This was such an atrociously mediocre film. I also couldn't help but compare this to Predator: Badlands. Earth in this film is described as a planet where every living being can kill humans. The planet that Dek goes to in Badlands is described as just that, and they showed that far better than After Earth. Both main characters try to prove themselves to their mean fathers. After Earth was toothless in this regard. Other than Jaden Smith whining and calling his dad a coward, which made no sense, there was really no pushback against Will. In Badlands, Dek would ultimately fight his father! Both films have a monster that is touted as the baddest alive. In Badlands, it was the Kalisk, the unkillable beast. In After Earth, it's the Ursa, which looks generic and crappy because of the CGI. The action in Badlands was better. The on-location shooting was better. Everything about Predator: Badlands was better. Jaden Smith couldn't carry the movie while Will Smith was sitting in a different location for the majority of the film. He would've benefited from a chatty partner like Elle Fanning was in Predator: Badlands.

A huge misfire in Will Smith's career, one that's best forgotten about. But I subjected myself to it. That was a mistake. As far as any positives, I will give a little nod to the score. James Newton Howard did the music. He worked with Shyamalan multiple times, including The Sixth Sense. Howard has scored some other great movies. The score should've been more prominent. Several sequences have Jaden Smith doing stuff with no dialogue, just his grunts and groans and other little sound effects. Any positive element the movie has is drowned out by poor filmmaking choices. This is definitely the worst Shyamalan movie I have seen. Granted, I haven't seen The Last Airbender, Trap, The Happening, and others. The sad thing is that even if After Earth wasn't the worst Shyamalan film I've seen, it was going to suck in some way because Shyamalan hasn't made a great movie in decades. Eventually, I'll see more of his "good" or "not bad" films, but my opinion of him won't change. The guy has fallen off, but I keep watching him! I want him to make a comeback, but for whatever reason, it hasn't happened. I would also like a Will Smith comeback, but he keeps sabotaging himself. After Earth was a misfire, but at the time, it wasn't a career killer. Having said that, it's very interesting to look back at Will Smith's filmography and see many misfires before his personal life was publicly in shambles. But like Shyamalan, I will still watch him. Both of them are Philly guys, maybe it's a Philly thing. I love Kevin Bacon, he's from Philly. I'm not a Kevin Hart fan though, he's also from Philly. Surprisingly, one of the film locations for After Earth was in Pennsylvania, where I'm from. I'm guessing the forest parts and the mountains. Anyway, I'm rambling. After Earth sucks and is not worth anybody's time. Only watch if you're a Will Smith or Shyamalan completist.

3/10
 
  • Wow
Reactions: AncientBoi
RustInPeace said:
After Earth - Yet another dud by M. Night Shyamalan, who I believe never reached the heights of The Sixth Sense. What makes this stand out is that Shyamalan didn't have much creative control of the film, and he would later disown it. Will Smith is the main culprit, credited for the story, but definitely had a bigger hand. I felt that as I watched the movie, it was meant to be a vehicle for his son, but one where he's still a badass and unaccountable. There's hardly any pushback for his overly strict ways as a father, and his talk about fear is so preachy. Considering that Will Smith has some attachment to Scientology, or at least Dianetics, anti-fear talk reads like new-age religious bullshit mixed with motivational talk from the likes of Arnold Schwarzenegger. When told by someone who isn't emoting like Will Smith, the speech falls flat. Will Smith had a soul patch in this movie. I think that bit of hair was a prison for Smith's soul. The guy was mostly emotionless, with the only exceptions being lame streams of tears and maybe slight anger. That alone sinks the movie. Will Smith's greatest asset is his charisma, his energy. When that's gone, his presence is a complete waste of time. While Will Smith would later regret After Earth and taking accountability for Jaden Smith's involvement, it doesn't make his son's acting any less awful. As the boy grew up, Jayden's innocence and bubbly personality dissolved. He had something in The Pursuit of Happyness, and that's not in After Earth at all. Half the time, he's as boring as Will Smith. The other half, he's trying to emote, and it comes off as forced and annoying. It also sounded like the Smiths were going for some accent. It sounded a little British, but sometimes, there was no accent present. So what was the point?

According to IMDB trivia, Shyamalan was primarily in charge of the blocking and the visual aspects of the film. So he does deserve some blame. This movie is just ugly. The CGI was really poor. The lighting on Jaden Smith clashed with the VFX to the point where you can clearly tell he's not in the location. This ruins the effectiveness of the on-location shooting. The forest parts felt the most real. When they got to the giant eagle's nest and the volcano in the climax, the fakeness really took over. Some of Shyamalan does poke through the Will Smith miasma. A few camera shots were definitely Shyamalan, such as when Jaden Smith was in the center of the frame and almost looking directly into the camera. I think there was even a 4th wall break before the ship was destroyed. The unnecessary jump scare at the end of the Jaden Smith dream sequence was 100% Shyamalan. He's credited as a co-writer, and I think that shows with the drab dialogue, monotone delivery, and the really awkward attempts at dry humor. So while this movie isn't completely the fault of Shyamalan, he is not blameless. As a director, he failed to elevate the movie. He couldn't make chicken salad out of chicken shit. Will Smith does deserve more blame.

Man, 101 minutes, but the movie felt like it was over 2 hours. This was so damn slow. The action sequences were not exciting at all, often looking bad because of the CGI. I was surprised to see that Chad Stahelski, director of the John Wick films, was the stunt coordinator and 2nd unit director. I couldn't really feel the quality of his work because the movie sucked. I was also surprised to see Zoe Kravitz in this. She only appeared in flashbacks and that ridiculous dream sequence. There wasn't really anything that was "so bad it's good." This was such an atrociously mediocre film. I also couldn't help but compare this to Predator: Badlands. Earth in this film is described as a planet where every living being can kill humans. The planet that Dek goes to in Badlands is described as just that, and they showed that far better than After Earth. Both main characters try to prove themselves to their mean fathers. After Earth was toothless in this regard. Other than Jaden Smith whining and calling his dad a coward, which made no sense, there was really no pushback against Will. In Badlands, Dek would ultimately fight his father! Both films have a monster that is touted as the baddest alive. In Badlands, it was the Kalisk, the unkillable beast. In After Earth, it's the Ursa, which looks generic and crappy because of the CGI. The action in Badlands was better. The on-location shooting was better. Everything about Predator: Badlands was better. Jaden Smith couldn't carry the movie while Will Smith was sitting in a different location for the majority of the film. He would've benefited from a chatty partner like Elle Fanning was in Predator: Badlands.

A huge misfire in Will Smith's career, one that's best forgotten about. But I subjected myself to it. That was a mistake. As far as any positives, I will give a little nod to the score. James Newton Howard did the music. He worked with Shyamalan multiple times, including The Sixth Sense. Howard has scored some other great movies. The score should've been more prominent. Several sequences have Jaden Smith doing stuff with no dialogue, just his grunts and groans and other little sound effects. Any positive element the movie has is drowned out by poor filmmaking choices. This is definitely the worst Shyamalan movie I have seen. Granted, I haven't seen The Last Airbender, Trap, The Happening, and others. The sad thing is that even if After Earth wasn't the worst Shyamalan film I've seen, it was going to suck in some way because Shyamalan hasn't made a great movie in decades. Eventually, I'll see more of his "good" or "not bad" films, but my opinion of him won't change. The guy has fallen off, but I keep watching him! I want him to make a comeback, but for whatever reason, it hasn't happened. I would also like a Will Smith comeback, but he keeps sabotaging himself. After Earth was a misfire, but at the time, it wasn't a career killer. Having said that, it's very interesting to look back at Will Smith's filmography and see many misfires before his personal life was publicly in shambles. But like Shyamalan, I will still watch him. Both of them are Philly guys, maybe it's a Philly thing. I love Kevin Bacon, he's from Philly. I'm not a Kevin Hart fan though, he's also from Philly. Surprisingly, one of the film locations for After Earth was in Pennsylvania, where I'm from. I'm guessing the forest parts and the mountains. Anyway, I'm rambling. After Earth sucks and is not worth anybody's time. Only watch if you're a Will Smith or Shyamalan completist.

3/10
Click to expand...
Yeah, I recall how critics of the time said it was meant as a Jaden Smith vehicle. (Much like Gone Baby Gone was supposed to launch Casey Affleck's acting career.) The bad reviews really destroyed any audience enthusiasm for After Earth.

Reading this review, I'm reminded of the Unbreakable trilogy. Did the M. Night Shyamalan fandom go nuts, when Bruce Willis appeared at the end of Split, or were they already aware that it was part of the trilogy? Also, is Glass considered a strong finale?

To be honest, I wasn't really following movies much by the 2010's, so I don't know if Split and Glass are considered "Good" or "Not Bad" projects from M. Night Shyamalan.
 
Mortal Kombat (2021) - A decent quality leak of MKII turned up online on Thursday. This was a pleasant surprise. I wanted to revisit the 2021 film, so with this development, I had to do a double feature. This was my 2nd viewing of the 2021 film. I last watched it back when it released on HBO Max. In the 5 years since that viewing, I've come down on the film, believing I overrated it. I was so hyped that I kind of looked past the multiple flaws. On the 2nd viewing, those flaws hit a bit more, but I don't hate them as much as other people. That includes the original character Cole Young. He definitely shouldn't even be in the movie, but I like Lewis Tan. I felt bad for him because he did the best he could. He could've been another character. Hell, I would not have minded if he were Johnny Cage. Asian-American Cage, I can live with that. The tone of the movie was too serious. The acting is sometimes stiff, though I point the finger at Simon McQuoid, who made his debut as a film director here. The writing can be rough. The CGI is not of high quality, but this was a mid-budget film. The green screen can be obvious. Despite those flaws, I still enjoyed the film. Most of the fight scenes are good. The movie is bookended with great fight scenes and overall sequences. The gore is delightful, though it's crazy that it's not as gory as the modern MK games! Some of the characters were great. Bi-Han (Joe Taslim), Hanzo Hasashi (Hiroyuki Sanada), Liu Kang (Ludi Lin), and Kung Lao (Max Huang) were among my favorites. The absolute MVP was Kano! Josh Lawson got the assignment, being one of the few funny characters in the movie, perfectly adapting Kano from the modern video games. I even think he takes the character further in terms of comedy, while not sacrificing the dirty rotten scoundrel persona. I loved Kano's arc, too; he basically was ahead of his peers at first. The movie felt like a prequel; the tournament didn't even happen. It was more or less a build-up to the sequel, where the tournament does happen, and Johnny Cage enters the arena. For what's essentially a first step, it's decent. It's certainly better than Annihilation, but it pales in comparison to the 1995 original film. Still, it was nice to revisit it, and I'll definitely watch it again. 7/10

Mortal Kombat II - This is an improvement from the 2021 film in every way. That's really the simplest and probably best way to describe it. It's what the 2021 film should've been. More humor, more fight scenes, more locations that look like the video games, even though the green screen is obvious. More gore, more stakes, more hype overall, less filler, less Cole Young. It does everything it needed to do, but it's definitely not perfect. Karl Urban as Johnny Cage was a success overall. He constantly wrestled with doing an American accent. The use of a stunt double is so damn obvious, but the movie actually is self-aware about it. As much levity as Johnny Cage added to the movie, he doesn't replace Kano, who is once again the best character in the movie! I think Josh Lawson tried to one-up himself. You can tell he's ad-libbing more and has been given more freedom to do whatever. It pays off, but Karl Urban does some close. The other new additions to the movie were also great. Kitana, Jade, and Shao Kahn were generally done better than their previous counterparts. The woman who played Kitana actually has emotions, unlike the woman who played Kitana in the first 2 films. Shao Kahn is a monster, a superpowered threat. In Mortal Kombat Annihilation, he's a bitch-ass daddy's boy. Anyway, I would've liked more gore, cleaner fight choreography, and less hyperactive editing. You can tell who were actual martial artists. The Kung Lao and Liu Kang fight is easily the best out of both films in this new series. I'd even say it's the best fight since Liu Kang and Reptile in the 1995 film. That's high praise. I'll definitely rewatch this film. I probably will as soon as the official digital version releases. I need to compare it with this leak. Anyway, this is a must-see for Mortal Kombat fans. They listened to the fans' complaints from the first movie and made a higher-quality sequel. Listening to the fans can work, just look at the Sonic movies. We probably would've gotten just 1 movie with the horrific original design. Instead, a very solid trilogy with a 4th movie coming next year. Mortal Kombat III is definitely coming, and I'm totally down for that. 8/10

The Cell - This is a strong case of style over substance. The imaginative worlds depicted in the minds of certain characters are pretty to look at. They still looked like locations created for commercials and music videos. The surrealism is appealing. Director Tarsem Singh was clearly influenced by David Lynch, with some clear references to Twin Peaks. Vincent D'Onofrio was very committed to his performance, doing a lot to make me care about an otherwise generic serial killer. Unfortunately, the movie is weighed down by monotone acting, a very drab Vince Vaughn, an unexciting Jennifer Lopez, and ineffective writing. It's a major slog. The movie lumbers when it's in the real world, but the imaginative worlds start to become boring. Apparently, Tarsem Singh did a better job in The Fall. I'll eventually watch that. I can see the potential, he just needed a better story. This one lacked so much depth. It doesn't really tell you anything profound or new about serial killers. You're better off watching Se7en, Zodiac, The Silence of the Lambs, or Memories of Murder. 5/10

Manhunter - Oh, you can definitely watch this film instead of The Cell, as it's a much more engaging serial killer story. For one, director Michael Mann was very keen on the procedural aspect. Will Graham and the FBI's process was much more interesting than the generic shit done in The Cell. You can tell the filmmakers in The Cell didn't do much research into serial killers and police investigations. Michael Mann succeeded with that. He also succeeded in making a pretty stylish, very suspenseful, atmospheric, and supremely 80s thriller. Oh my goodness, the soundtrack alone defines the 80s feel of the film. I didn't expect that, especially because I'm so familiar with The Silence of the Lambs. This was my first viewing of Manhunter. Long overdue. I was surprised at how small Hannibal Lecter's presence was. I know Anthony Hopkins didn't have much screen time in The Silence of the Lambs, but he felt monumental in that. Here, he's minor. But it proved to be just right, and Brian Cox's performance was great. His Lecter felt meaner and more antagonizing, while Hopkins was more playful and captivating. I would want to sit and listen to Hopkins as Hannibal. Cox, on the other hand, made me want to punch him in the face. Perfect role for the man as he's a notoriously grumpy shit-talker. I have seen Red Dragon, which was a remake of Manhunter. Sadly, Manhunter has made Red Dragon worse for me. I liked Red Dragon, even though Brett Ratner is a horrible person. Most of the characters in Manhunter were better than their remake versions. I liked William Peterson's portrayal of Will Graham more than Edward Norton's, for example. Tom Noonan was much scarier as the killer than Ralph Fiennes. Joan Allen and Emily Watson were pretty much on the same level in playing the blind woman. It's easy to prefer Phillip Seymour Hoffman in his portrayal of the sleazy reporter over Stephen Lang. There is a lot more craft in Manhunter. Red Dragon is mainly carried by its stellar cast. Manhunter's cast is very strong, but I think the movie's a grander showcase for Michael Mann. The cinematography, pacing, editing, and overall feel of the movie were amazing. Mann was so consistent, never missing a beat and timing the scares and reveals very well. The climax was a little goofy for me, but that was still enjoyable. Some of the music can take me out of the movie, but that's also still enjoyable. Comparing this to the other Hannibal films would be a major hassle. Manhunter is definitely better than the Hannibal film directed by Ridley Scott and Red Dragon. As far as The Silence of the Lambs? Man, I don't know. Just 1 viewing of Manhunter isn't necessarily enough for me to rank it above The Silence of the Lambs. The fact that I'm unsure is a good sign of how great Manhunter is. Michael Mann rarely missed in his career, and this movie was definitely not a miss. It's a massive hit. 9/10
 
  • Like
Reactions: AncientBoi
1779646194954.png

The Island (2005)

This is definitely mid-2000's movie-making. Unlike Michael Bay's more recent efforts, like AMBULANCE (2022), you can see and enjoy all the action (no shaky-cam). The movie starts off very Coma-esque before shifting gears into popcorn action. It's not overflowing with chases and explosions, but it has enough for any action fan. Recommended, but remember to turn your brain off.

TL;DR: If you enjoyed The One (2001) with Jet Li, you'd have a nice enough time with this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RustInPeace
RustInPeace said:
After Earth - Yet another dud by M. Night Shyamalan, who I believe never reached the heights of The Sixth Sense.
Click to expand...

I won't watch the movie because I absolutely cannot stand Will 7 Jada Smith but imo Signs, The Village, Lady in the Water, The Visit, Split, Glass, Old, and especially the series Servant are all better than The Sixth Sense.
 
Alone in the Dark - I finally popped my Uwe Boll cherry, and it hurt. I've heard of how inept the guy is for years. I know that he made films to capitalize on some tax loophole in Germany. A loophole that they closed because of him! I know that he did a bunch of video game adaptations that had next to nothing to do with the source material. I know that many of his movies are believed to be among the worst of all time. I've seen some clips that hint at his incompetence. Finally watching a movie from start to finish, I simply can't disagree. Alone in the Dark is an abomination. Another thing commonly said about his films is how unintentionally hilarious they can be. Sometimes, Alone in the Dark made me laugh, but when it's not funny, it's painfully boring. The laughs mostly come from the campy, derivative, and overall shitty action sequences. Uwe Boll seemingly ripped off action sequences from movies he loved at the time, including Blade and The Matrix, and slapped together a story around it. The story gives nothing. The actors give almost nothing! Christian Slater looks tired most of the time. Tara Reid was a charisma black hole, who was miscast as an archeologist. Stephen Dorff has some energy, but he couldn't really elevate the film. He was in Blade too, surely he recognized some similarities. This was also telling as now I think Dorff has done shitty movies for decades. It wasn't over the last few years, as I initially believed from watching Gunslingers last year. Slater gives unnecessary narration, and some of it exposes continuity errors. For example, he said he got attacked by someone earlier in the morning. That happened the day before! He also high kicks and spin kicks randomly! There was a random agent who did martial arts with a possessed guy who also did martial arts! That was so out of place and was another example of Boll throwing in action sequences based on his tastes. The music is so generic and poorly used, but that adds to the comedy! Nuclear Blast apparently paid $30k to feature their bands in the movie. Those metal songs sloppily included, but they were highlights! Awful editing also hurt the movie, but sometimes that was funny! Such as unnecessary slow motion!

One Uwe Boll movie is more than enough, but I would actually watch some others! I'm willing to watch pure shit to enjoy some funny shit. Apparently Alone in the Dark is seen as one of his worse, so nowhere else to go but up? Alone in the Dark would be a fun watch party, but the boring shit needed to be cut out. For the most part, this film is a waste of time.

2/10
 
  • Like
Reactions: AncientBoi
Mario Galaxy movie. Not as funny as the 1st movie, but still enjoyable.
Post automatically merged:

RustInPeace said:
After Earth - Yet another dud by M. Night Shyamalan, who I believe never reached the heights of The Sixth Sense. What makes this stand out is that Shyamalan didn't have much creative control of the film, and he would later disown it. Will Smith is the main culprit, credited for the story, but definitely had a bigger hand. I felt that as I watched the movie, it was meant to be a vehicle for his son, but one where he's still a badass and unaccountable. There's hardly any pushback for his overly strict ways as a father, and his talk about fear is so preachy. Considering that Will Smith has some attachment to Scientology, or at least Dianetics, anti-fear talk reads like new-age religious bullshit mixed with motivational talk from the likes of Arnold Schwarzenegger. When told by someone who isn't emoting like Will Smith, the speech falls flat. Will Smith had a soul patch in this movie. I think that bit of hair was a prison for Smith's soul. The guy was mostly emotionless, with the only exceptions being lame streams of tears and maybe slight anger. That alone sinks the movie. Will Smith's greatest asset is his charisma, his energy. When that's gone, his presence is a complete waste of time. While Will Smith would later regret After Earth and taking accountability for Jaden Smith's involvement, it doesn't make his son's acting any less awful. As the boy grew up, Jayden's innocence and bubbly personality dissolved. He had something in The Pursuit of Happyness, and that's not in After Earth at all. Half the time, he's as boring as Will Smith. The other half, he's trying to emote, and it comes off as forced and annoying. It also sounded like the Smiths were going for some accent. It sounded a little British, but sometimes, there was no accent present. So what was the point?

According to IMDB trivia, Shyamalan was primarily in charge of the blocking and the visual aspects of the film. So he does deserve some blame. This movie is just ugly. The CGI was really poor. The lighting on Jaden Smith clashed with the VFX to the point where you can clearly tell he's not in the location. This ruins the effectiveness of the on-location shooting. The forest parts felt the most real. When they got to the giant eagle's nest and the volcano in the climax, the fakeness really took over. Some of Shyamalan does poke through the Will Smith miasma. A few camera shots were definitely Shyamalan, such as when Jaden Smith was in the center of the frame and almost looking directly into the camera. I think there was even a 4th wall break before the ship was destroyed. The unnecessary jump scare at the end of the Jaden Smith dream sequence was 100% Shyamalan. He's credited as a co-writer, and I think that shows with the drab dialogue, monotone delivery, and the really awkward attempts at dry humor. So while this movie isn't completely the fault of Shyamalan, he is not blameless. As a director, he failed to elevate the movie. He couldn't make chicken salad out of chicken shit. Will Smith does deserve more blame.

Man, 101 minutes, but the movie felt like it was over 2 hours. This was so damn slow. The action sequences were not exciting at all, often looking bad because of the CGI. I was surprised to see that Chad Stahelski, director of the John Wick films, was the stunt coordinator and 2nd unit director. I couldn't really feel the quality of his work because the movie sucked. I was also surprised to see Zoe Kravitz in this. She only appeared in flashbacks and that ridiculous dream sequence. There wasn't really anything that was "so bad it's good." This was such an atrociously mediocre film. I also couldn't help but compare this to Predator: Badlands. Earth in this film is described as a planet where every living being can kill humans. The planet that Dek goes to in Badlands is described as just that, and they showed that far better than After Earth. Both main characters try to prove themselves to their mean fathers. After Earth was toothless in this regard. Other than Jaden Smith whining and calling his dad a coward, which made no sense, there was really no pushback against Will. In Badlands, Dek would ultimately fight his father! Both films have a monster that is touted as the baddest alive. In Badlands, it was the Kalisk, the unkillable beast. In After Earth, it's the Ursa, which looks generic and crappy because of the CGI. The action in Badlands was better. The on-location shooting was better. Everything about Predator: Badlands was better. Jaden Smith couldn't carry the movie while Will Smith was sitting in a different location for the majority of the film. He would've benefited from a chatty partner like Elle Fanning was in Predator: Badlands.

A huge misfire in Will Smith's career, one that's best forgotten about. But I subjected myself to it. That was a mistake. As far as any positives, I will give a little nod to the score. James Newton Howard did the music. He worked with Shyamalan multiple times, including The Sixth Sense. Howard has scored some other great movies. The score should've been more prominent. Several sequences have Jaden Smith doing stuff with no dialogue, just his grunts and groans and other little sound effects. Any positive element the movie has is drowned out by poor filmmaking choices. This is definitely the worst Shyamalan movie I have seen. Granted, I haven't seen The Last Airbender, Trap, The Happening, and others. The sad thing is that even if After Earth wasn't the worst Shyamalan film I've seen, it was going to suck in some way because Shyamalan hasn't made a great movie in decades. Eventually, I'll see more of his "good" or "not bad" films, but my opinion of him won't change. The guy has fallen off, but I keep watching him! I want him to make a comeback, but for whatever reason, it hasn't happened. I would also like a Will Smith comeback, but he keeps sabotaging himself. After Earth was a misfire, but at the time, it wasn't a career killer. Having said that, it's very interesting to look back at Will Smith's filmography and see many misfires before his personal life was publicly in shambles. But like Shyamalan, I will still watch him. Both of them are Philly guys, maybe it's a Philly thing. I love Kevin Bacon, he's from Philly. I'm not a Kevin Hart fan though, he's also from Philly. Surprisingly, one of the film locations for After Earth was in Pennsylvania, where I'm from. I'm guessing the forest parts and the mountains. Anyway, I'm rambling. After Earth sucks and is not worth anybody's time. Only watch if you're a Will Smith or Shyamalan completist.

3/10
Click to expand...

3 out of 10. You are generous.

I remember seeing that movie and think: "wtf, wasn't there a better role to nepo-cast your brain dead son (Jaden), Will? Let the boy be happy doing its famous nonsensical tweets."
 
Last edited by Exnor,
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: RustInPeace and AncientBoi
La Llorona - I'm referring to the Guatemalan film from Jayro Bustamante, not "The Curse of La Llorona," which came out the same year. That movie apparently relies on jump scares and is very much a Hollywood horror film. This one is a lot more personal and emotionally resonant. It's a political drama wrapped in a horror blanket. It's as if the family in The Zone of Interest was cursed. It has similar elements to The Zone of Interest, which came out a few years later. Both films are about a family living their lives peacefully, with the patriarch being an agent of genocide. There's no reckoning in The Zone of Interest, but both films really highlight the "banality of evil" theme. The patriarch doesn't recognize that they're murderers, and the matriarch doesn't draw the line with that. In La Llorona, she doesn't even draw the line in sexual assault! Oh my goodness, the father was clearly meant to be the villain of the film, but the mother is up there. There isn't clearly crafted joy for the audience to have. IT's a very cold and infuriating movie as you see horrible people get away with being just that. The movie's a little over 90 minutes, but it's very slow. It slowly gets to a point where the family is suffering, but they still become horrible people! The father, for example, still got access to a gun after the horrible misuse of it in the first act, his deteriorating health coming to the forefront, and the creeping curse.

The movie has a historical context, which is established at the beginning of the film. In 1982-83, the native Mayan population in Guatemala was the victims of a genocide by the government. The father was the former dictator of that time, based on the real-life figure, Efrain Ríos Montt. It also helps to know about the Latin American folktale of La Llorona, the "Weeping Woman." The movie also depicts that folktale, nicely incorporating it as a form of revenge against the former dictator. The movie is very carefully constructed, with the scares coming at just the right moments. The atmosphere is very strong. A big part of that is the amazing sound design. For most of the movie, you hear constant background noise. It's mostly the sounds of protestors outside of the dictator's home. They kept up their rage and passion 24/7! That specifically reminded me of The Zone of Interest. The sound design in that film is a major highlight, where you hear the war in the background, but never see it. It's a constant reminder of what the main character has caused. Combine that with what goes on in the house, and the movie becomes filled with moments, even at the quietest parts. They do adhere to some tropes, like the creepy long-haired woman, but the execution is much stronger than a mainstream horror film. It is a legitimately scary movie with a poignant historical context. It reminds me of The Devil's Backbone from Guillermo Del Toro. While this movie is specifically about Guatemala, it's reflective of Latin America in general, the horrors committed by dictators, and the stamping out of left-wing resistance.

I very much admire and respect the film. I was a little torn on the rating. I think the movie could've been longer. I was surprised when the movie ended. The movie did wrap up nicely, but I thought there would be a bit more. More scares, more suffering for the family. The father and mother suffered the most, but the adult daughter didn't have anything directly happen to her. There's also family drama that is not elaborated. I'm mainly nitpicking, justifying my not giving this film a 10/10. I initially gave it an 8, but I thought it over. I compared the movie to what I watched immediately after, the emotional investment, the real dread the movie crafted, and just how expertly constructed the film is. Definitely a socio-political message I can get behind. It's beyond just an entertaining horror film. So it should be rated as such. Shout out to the actors for playing their roles incredibly well, especially the father and mother. I hated them!

9/10

The Borderlands - The movie is also called "Final Prayer," which I think is a better title. It's a found footage film about 3 men investigating a small church. The movie was a bit of a chore for me to watch. I was so damn tired because of eating a large pizza meal. La Llorona was also rather draining. I'm also not a big fan of found footage films. This film reminded me of that as it hit upon many tropes that I don't vibe with. The glitching, the editing, and the overall visual presentation don't appeal to me much. The characters were strange. I wasn't sure if they were meant to be funny. When they were introduced, it felt like the film was leaning on comedy. Eventually, it became clear that it was a serious movie. Even so, it was tonally off at times. One character wasn't religious but believed that the church was haunted, while the other two characters in this team were religious but skeptical of any paranormal things in the church. The movie would eventually reveal haunting images that hint at the horrors of this church. I didn't react to them strongly enough because I was not very engaged with the movie. I was yawning a lot, and I was going in and out. At some points, I had to stand up and scratch the back of my leg to wake myself up. So the movie was pretty mid...until the ending. They really stuck the landing, as the climax was a final descent. What that descent revealed was completely unexpected! It dawned on me that I never thought about what the big reveal was. I guess I didn't care enough. But once the reveal happened, I was heavily invested. In hindsight, some of the scares from the film were effective. When they committed to the horror more than these flawed male characters, the movie is at its most effective. For example, a certain animal being set on fire and screaming. That was a strong image and sound! A glaring flaw of this film is that there are no women! None at all. Some movies can get away with that, like John Carpenter's The Thing. This movie didn't really justify that. They're in a small town in the UK, but surely there are women in that. They could've fit an assistant to the pastor or the investigative team. A woman certainly would've made the 3 men more tolerable. The movie would've still needed that great ending for me to ultimately forgive the film.

The rating could be lowered, but like La Llorona, I thought it over and decided to go with the higher rating. I might like the movie more, it would be interesting to see how the movie would play now that I know the ending. I'm not in any rush to see it though.

7/10
 
  • Like
Reactions: AncientBoi
AncientBoi said:
View attachment 575346

Wonderful to watch. Brought tears of joy to me. 👍



View attachment 575351

A lot of the powerhouse actors (besides John Wayne) of my time. I L:wub:ve wartime movies. 👍
Click to expand...
I've been meaning to watch Godzilla Minus One, I gotta hop on that.

Midway -- I love that movie! I saw it as a kid with a bunch of my friends...I re-watched it a couple of years ago, and it was still great! Although, that ending...the final scene at the harbor, they just filmed a bunch of people who were standing around, so you have the actors in their WWII uniforms, and then contemporary civilians with '70's hairstyles and bell-bottoms...I was laughing, I couldn't believe it. Oh well...still some great performances, by both the American and the Japanese actors!
 
  • Like
Reactions: AncientBoi

Site & Scene News

Go to forum More news

Popular threads in this forum

Gameoverse

Resident Evil (2026)

What happened to the classic manga collection on Archive.org?

Colony (2026)

Hope (2026)