Inglourious Basterds (2009)

When someone labels the best directors to have ever lived, one name should definitely come to mention Quentin Tarantino. Now, I'm not gonna fawn over Tarantino cause he had some really bad films like Sin City and Four Rooms.  However, when he's at his best, none can ever match.  When I first watched Basterds, I hated it, mainly cause I was a foolish 12.  Now that I'm 16, I can truly enjoy Basterds.  Seriously, this film was amazing!  I used to think Django Unchained was Tarantino's best 2000 film, but after a recent rewatch , I'm reconsidering.  Both films were good.  Don't get me wrong, but Django is in need of a rewatch.  However, Inglorious Basterds is Tarantino at his best.

Set in the 1940s, this World War 2 epic follows Lt. Aldo Raine as the leader of a ragtag group of soldiers sent to kill any Nazi, along with Hitler himself.  Meanwhile, a Jewish woman, who lost her family to Nazi soldiers, has set a trap.  She poses as the owner of a theater, which will premiere one of the supposedly best films ever.  Of course, Mr. Hitler will be in attendance.  Many plots are interwoven, including one about German soldier Hans Landa, who is much smarter than he appears.  The film has a different premise than his other films, but don't get that wrong.  It still has that Tarantino feel to it, so if you're not a fan of Pulp Fiction, Resevoir Dogs, or Kill Bill, stay away.  However, this a must see for Tarantino fans cause I will tell you this: It's one of his best works to date.

The best thing this film has going for it is Tarantino's script without a doubt.  If you're not a fan of dialogue driven films, you'll leave this film wanting more.  Much of the film is comedic, which can be interpreted wrong at times.  Sometimes the comedy seemed to happen at the wrong time, making it seem as if every German soldier deserved to die.  This is my biggest complaint for the film because it makes it seem as if all German soldiers supported the Nazi regime.  It's inaccurate, and many Germans may feel it's distasteful.  I kind of do, but I can't help but say that it boosts the film.  Of course, this film features Tarantino's style of violence.  Outrageous amounts of blood spill and some deaths are very brutal, namely the introduction to the Bear Jew (played by Eli Roth).  It's violence actually helps the film, however.  It gives it a very realistic feel reminding us that WW2 was a brutal fight.  While doing this, Tarantino also entertains un in his own special way.

Also, I can't review this film without mentioning Christoph Waltz' Hans Landa.  This guy is truly amazing.  Every scene he's in is completely amazing.  His character is one of the best villains ever.  He lifts this film above average territory straight into amazing.  The opening scene in which he haunts down a Jewish family reveals everything about him.  I love a film where I can understand a character based off of one scene.  I understood that Landa was a much smarter soldier, who only cares for his own well being.  He's ruthless and cold.  It truly is amazing.. Tarantino made a really amazing character.  However, I wasn't fond of Pitt's performance in this film.  He was used more as the comic relief, and while it was funny at times, he gets annoying after a while.  I really felt like he really  didn't add anything to the film.

I personally made this gif.

Overall, Inglorious Basterds is a pretty good film.  Definitely one of Tarantino's best written films right now.  It features some intense scenes and some pretty crazy shootouts.  Sure, the violence maybe a little too gratuitous, but it lets be honest here.  Nobody does violence better than Tarantino.  Some would complain about the very distasteful portrayal of all German soldiers because most didn't support the Third Reich.  However, I loved this film, mainly cause of the grand scale of things.  Rather than feel  like a small time robbery like most of Tarantino's films, it feels more epic in it's scope, which really gives a vibe unmatched by his other films.  Of course the film is weighed down by the comedy, which really wasn't bad, but it felt unnecessary in some moments.  However, I believe this was Tarantino's best film since Pulp Fiction.  And I believe Tarantino thinks the same way.  In the end, a character says, "You know.  This might just be my masterpiece."  Is that Tarantino telling us something?  I think so.

8.5/10

The Butler (2013)

Ever since Spike Lee came into the scene, a recent slew of "slave" films have came out, giving black empowerment.  Now, I'm not saying this is anything particularly bad.  It just hurts that this formula is already feeling tired.  The saying "Don't fix what's not broken" doesn't apply here.  I've seen this done multiple times Also, much of the film is pretty preachy at moments.  It really drives it's point across to us and then bludgeons us to death with it.  Lee Daniel's the Butler is a classic case of what I like to call "Spike Lee-ism".  Spike Lee has directed some pretty good films, like Do the Right Thing.  However, some of his films like "Miracle at St. Anna" is pretty preachy.  Lee Daniels follows this route and it just doesn't work.  Also, on a side-note, I watched 10 minutes of Precious and quitted cause I hate watching fat people eat.  (No offense)

The Butler is excellently shot and I will give it props for that.  It captures the warm, fuzzy feel of the 1950s....for a while.  Also, Cuba Gooding Jr. was the best part of this film, adding some charm to a rather boring role.  Forrest Whitaker comes in as our main character, Cecil.  He's pretty good for the most part, even though the make-up to make him look younger is atrocious.  Oprah, who is not a person I'm really interested, played Cecil's wife.  I didn't mind her, but I didn't find her "amazing" or "perfect" as some of the reviews stated.  Also, the film presents some huge historical inaccuracies, namely Richard Nixon.  Now, I don't mind inaccuracies if they make the plot more interesting, but this was pointless.  In the film, it portrayed Nixon as a man who cared for black equality.  In real life, he didn't.  He was indifferent to it and only cared to get the blacks' vote.  This didn't help the film's plot advance in any way, so this was a bit confusing.

Overall, it's a disappointing film that probably won't last in your mind for T-minus a day.  I could understand the appeal to this film because it is actually a nicely shot film, and Forrest Whitaker and Cuba Gooding Jr. give great performances.  However, I wasn't fond due to the lack of interest in the story and the historical inaccuracies.  It left me wanting more, and it doesn't provide.  Also, I have a weird thing to complain about.  In the beginning of the film, Cecil, as a kid, is working in a plantation farm.  He's about 9 or 10 at this time.  However, it cuts to 1950 and he is supposed to look 20-something (even though he looks 50).  Wasn't slavery abolished in around the 1860s?  That means he should have been dead (around 100 years old).  However, he lives all the way to the turn of the century.  Huh?  Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

5/10

30 Days of Night (2007)

Man, this had some real potential.  I mean, this could have been in the makings of a great horror flick.  Ultimately, it falls flat on it's face and ends up as one of the few horror films that had unrealized potentials.  I mean, the concept is pretty awesome.  Vampires roaming an Alaskan town for 30 days of no rules.  That would have been a masterpiece in the hands of a greater director/screenwriter.  Give it to someone like the director of Ringu (Not the Gore Verbinski remake) and we would be talking some of the creepiest films ever.  Unfortunately, while there are pretty cool moments, it doesn't mask the cliched script, cardboard characters, and pretty weak performances.  I really wanted to like this, but it's not good.

30 Days of Night is about a small local town in Alaska.  Of course, if you knew anything about your geography, you'd know Alaska is very cold, causing huge snowstorms.  So once every year, these snowstorms cover the sun, literally giving Alaska 30 days of night.  Imagine going to school at nighttime.  Pretty intense right?  Well, just before this begins, a ship carrying around, oh let's say, 100/200 vampires enter the coast of this city.  So, enter our main character, Eben.  He's a sheriff, who is snooping around the town due to weird occurrences.  Then, to his and everyone's horror, the town is raided by the vampires, killing practically everyone.  So, Eben and his friends hide from the vampires, trying to survive.  That premise is epic.  No words needed.  A film where vampires can roam all around all day is pretty cool.  Especially, considering that the film is practically shot at night.

Unfortunately, that is where most positives end.  Ben Foster appears as the psycho, loony man, who warns everyone of the vampires' arrival, and he's really great.  Unfortunately, he gets little screen time.  And his character goes nowhere.....No literally, he goes nowhere.  He's handcuffed to a bed.  That's as good as the acting gets cause everyone else's was pure garbage.  Seriously, for a guy who was up and coming as Josh Hartnett was, he really wasn't that good of an actor.  Also, this is the film that killed his career.  Seriously, where did this guy go?  The female lead was the worst.  Every line was stiff and she proves again why blondes can't act.  It is clear as to why this film never won any Oscars.  Well, besides the fact that it's a horror flick.  But that's okay so long as the film has great dialogue, right!!!!??

WRONG!!!  This film has the worst one-liners ever.  Even Ben Foster's line "Their coming tonight." sounded really stupid.  Seriously, don't go into this film expecting an Oscar worthy script.  Also, there were many plotholes.  Like when so-and-so turns himself/herself into a vampire, he/she says "I can smell you guys' blood."  That's cool and all, but how come the other vampires couldn't smell them when they were hiding?  I guess the script writer forgot that.  Also, the death of one of the villains (Oh, and it's not a spoiler cause we all know some of the villains have to die) is terrible!!!  A fist rams through his head?  What?  Seriously, that was the worst villain death ever.  Kill yourselfs, David Slade and Steve Niles.  Seriously, this could have been a great film!  Why, oh why, do I get this feeling like the writer just quit halfway through and just wrote the first thing that came to mind.

Overall, 30 Days of Night is a very terrible disappointment.  From an awesome concept and some genuinely scary scenes (OKAY, JUST ONE!!), this film falls flat.  It's a shame too considering the costume design was pretty neat and Ben Foster gave a good performance.  The film just doesn't cohere like it should have.  Instead, we're given a weird death scene.  Followed by a huge rip off of the ending of Blade 2.  Seriously, it's the same exact scene.  Just with white folk and a different setting.  If you know me, you should know how much film tropes/rip offs really piss me off.  After an interesting start, some good trailers, and an amazing concept, the film itself is nowhere near as cool as the things I mentioned.  It just doesn't work.  Nope.  Not at all.

4.5/10

Monsters

Well, this was a very great surprise!  Monsters is a truly magnificent film that relies more on the atmosphere of the world rather than to just scare you every other second.  It is a truly beautifully crafted film from director Gareth Edwards, who will create the new Godzilla film.  Monsters is an extremely low budget creature feature that relies more on dialogue than the actual creatures.  Yes, you should go in expecting more of a character film, rather than the aliens.  Actually, I think the aliens only appear like four times throughout the entire film.  A very polarizing film, many have called this a true masterpiece, while others call it a boring, slow creature feature.  The first film for this director and rather than making a dumb film, he talks about the immigration reforms.  It invoked a similar feeling from District 9 and Elysium.  However, rather than being an action film, Monsters is part romance, part sci fi, and part propaganda (in the nicest possible way of putting it)

Monsters starts off by covering what happened.  Apparently, the scientists at NASA had a belief that extraterrestrial life existed, so they sent a probe to search the deep vacuum of space.  As the probe is returning to Earth, something damages the probe, and it crash lands into Mexico.  That all happened six years ago.  It's been so long that they aliens have resided on Earth, that they aren't even considered aliens anymore....Their residents.  The American Government (like always) takes control of the matter, rather than allowing help from other countries.  They seal off many parts of Mexico, labeling the parts with aliens as the "Infected Zone".  So, six years later (the film is set in 2010), the Mexican residents have learned to live with the aliens, though the aliens cause destruction and the death of millions of people.  Anyways, so cut to our main character.  He's a photographer, who is sent to capture pictures of aliens.  Unfortunately, his job soon turns into a rescue mission in which he must bring his boss's daughter from Mexico back to the states, going through the "Infected Zone".

The premise literally carried this film a long way.  The unique ideas being tossed around were amazing, and it livened up the film.  But enough of the premise, let's get talking about the film.  Like I mentioned before, it's a character driven film.  The characters felt very realistic and were well developed.  So much so, that I actually cared for them near the end.  The acting was well done on both parts from Scoot McNairy and Whitney Abel.  They both had charisma and were very impressive.  The message the film implies about immigration and who the real monsters were, felt a little heavy handed at times.  However, it mostly didn't bother me, with the exception of a few scenes.  Monsters is also excellently shot.  For a rookie director, Edwards truly has an eye for great shots of Mexico, making the country feel vibrant, while having a hint of depletion because of the constant attacks from the aliens.  There were many spectacular things going on.

On the face of it, Monsters would seem like a very boring film to people, who don't enjoy dialogue.  Many complained about the lack of actual Monsters.  I personally think that is a very idiotic thing to say about a film.  Sure, it may not be as exciting as other creature features, but that doesn't mean it's any worse.  Very few films have created very realistic characters along with aliens.  However, this does that, and then some.  Also, the first half doesn't show what the alien exactly looks like, leaving up to your imagination to think up of an alien.  However, I felt a little confused during some scenes.  I kept wondering if there was one alien species or multiple.  There were many hints that led me to believe multiple, but they really only showed one species.  Also, that creature in the promo poster is not what the monster looks like, so I'm not sure.  

Overall, Monsters is a very polarizing film.  Some loved it.  Some hated it, even though most only complained about the lack of monsters.  I personally thought this was a great film, though it gets a little preachy at times.  Also, the special effects weren't outstanding, but you have to remember: This was made on a budget of $500,000.  I thought the effects were decent, and it was a minor irk.  If you're looking for a pure monster fight to the death, stay away and watch Destroy All Monsters (The film with Godzilla, Mothra, Rodan, and Varan).  If you're looking for a film with real characters and plot, this film will please you very much.  Also, the ending was amazing and purely magical. 

8/10

The Heat (2013)

Sandra Bullock, fresh from a critically praised sci fi film, Gravity, give us another pitiful film to her resume.  I don't get the love for her.  She's just an annoying woman, who just happened to copy Brad and Angelina's style by adopting an African child.  I also don't get the love for Melissa McCarthy.  I personally don't even find her remotely funny or entertaining.  They mostly use her for fat jokes and let me tell you.....That joke is running dry.  Seriously, every other joke in this film is a fat joke about how she looks like an ape or some stupid thing, ew.  This film also comes from another overrated person: the director of Bridesmaids.  That film gave McCarthy a start in this world and I can never forgive it.  It was also extremely boring.  So, what do you get with this combination?  You get the Heat.

The plot is to convoluted to enjoy or explain so let me say this.  It's Sandra Bullock meeting a dirty fat slob (Not a fat joke from me.  She is a dirty fat slob in this film).  They don't like each other, but wait!  They end up doing so!  So unpredictable guys.  Also, McCarthy's brother used to work for a drug operation, but wait!  He goes back to them.  Wow, this film has a lot of crazy twists and turns guys!  McCarthy's parents and family (for a matter of fact) hate her.  Oh, but don't you blink for one second or you'll miss the greatest twist of all time!  They end up liking her!  Oooo, director Paul Feig sure is a master at twists.  M. Night, you have some competition right there.

If you can't tell that obvious sarcasm in the previous paragraph, I'll explain.  This film is predictable.  Nothing original added to the story.  Not even something remotely fresh.  This is just basically Kevin Smith's Cop Out redone with women.  Seriously, they could have done something much better.  It also doesn't help that female Jonah Hill is incapable of being nearly as funny as.....Jonah Hill.  She's just boring and all she does is cuss up a storm and flick her boss off.  Ooo, that's so daring Feig..  You are a risk taker.  It's nothing we haven't seen before, and it was done much better in previous films.  However, it's just a mere cash grab to the unsuspecting fools in the world.

Overall, avoid this film like you would avoid an STD.  It's not funny, fresh, or exciting.  It's the polar opposite of that.  The Heat is unfunny, redundant, and boring.  Paul Feig, congratulations on stealing my money.  You fooled me for the second time!  Oh, you swindler, you.  You won't get me the third time!  Sandra Bullock is completely unlikable to the point of where I just forgot she existed.  McCarthy......do I need to say more?  It's a terrible film and a terrible disappointment at that.  I prefer to not review a film with bias, so I thought maybe this would be decent.  Nope.  To all you future buddy cop comedies, come up with something new!  Cop Out and the Heat were to miserable fails.

2/10

Most Anticipated Films of 2014

2013 is officially done, and we leave behind that year of mediocre films for the new year.  There are many anticipated films coming out and I surely have a list.  This year will undoubtedly have stinkers and films that don't live up to the hype.  However, there might be that one special film that really makes you love this year.  Films all across the board from superhero films to monster bashes, invade your local movie theater and many will bring in the big racks of money.  So, without further ado, here's my Top 5 Most Anticipated Films of 2014.

5.

The Raid 2

In 2011, a low budget, simple action film came out called the Raid: Redemption.  This film opened up to high amounts of praise, given from everyone.  A story about a group of elite cops facing off multiple gang members, trying to get to their target, may seem like a boring, regular action film.  However, the Raid Redemption used the simple premise it's advantage, giving us many thrilling fight scenes and great choreography.  With all that said, it's pretty obvious why the Raid 2 is very anticipated.  The trailer also seemed to give off this new feel.....Sort of like, they're taking this a completely different route.  Let's hope that we still get that same brutal fighting style.

4.

The Grand Budapest Hotel

Featuring an A-list cast, this film seems pretty intriguing.  Of course, I'm a sucker to films with an original premise and interesting visual design, but something that makes this film stand out more than the others is purely the director: Wes Anderson.  He brought us great films like Fantastic Mr. Fox, The Royal Tenenbaums, and Moonrise Kingdom.  It's a pretty safe bet to say this will be good, if not great.  The trailer left me wondering what this will be about, but here's what I heard.  It will be about a young lobby boy who works at the legendary hotel while a war is going on.  He falls under the spell of concierge, plots of murder, and theft.  Sounds like a unique experience.

  3.

Monsters 2: Dark Continent

Recently, I watched a fantastic film on Netflix called Monsters.  Rather than being a full on monster movie, Monsters was more of a character driven film.  The director, who is doing the next Godzilla film, created a magnificent world filled with intrigue, beauty, and aliens.  It was basically part sci fi, part romance, and part social commentary (on immigration).  It was a clearly underrated film that got dumped on because mainly people where expecting more monsters, instead of people talking.  However, I knew what I was getting, so I had extremely low expectations (even though it has a 72% approval rating from the critics)  If they focus on the characters on this film, I think we will have a sure winner again.  Not much info has been released on this film, but judging by the name, I predict it will be located somewhere in Africa.  This definitely has my attention.

No trailer yet, but here's the trailer to the first film:

2.

Godzilla

Deciding between #1 and #2 was a very tough decision, but ultimately, I felt that I was more hyped for #1.  Godzilla is being directed by the guy who made Monsters, which I explained was a very good film.  There is no shortage of anticipation from me.  This new creature feature not only has him, but it even has Bryan Cranston aka Walter White, coming in as someone.  Due to the fact that reading up on the film may cause some spoilers, I decided to not read up on what this film will exactly be about.  In fact, I plan on never watching any of the trailers for it cause I'm too excited for it.  This, right here, is a must see for IMAX.  The film seems like it could top my favorite film of 2014, but I won't let the hype get all the way to me.  I remember the terrible 1998 version, which haunts me to this day for the fact that I was caught off guard.  Also, did I mention Walter White will be in this?

1.

Interstellar

I had to put Interstellar as #1 for a reason.  Actually, there are many reasons.  First off, I'm a sucker for time travel films, seeing as I've liked many of the ones I've seen.  I also like when someone tries to tackle time travel.  Sure, people could pick apart any time travel film.  However, people have to realize: Time travel within itself is a plothole.  You can't expect to make a good time travel film that has zero plot holes.  If you think you could do better, why not try?  Also, it's being directed by Christopher Nolan.  The guy who made Memento, Inception, The Dark Knight film series, the Prestige (though it did get a little too silly at the end).  Yeah, he's a great director.  Need more reason to see this?  It stars on of the best actors working today: Matthew McConaghey.  This guy did a complete 180 in his career, and he's coming off a very great Oscar season, being nominated for Best Actor.  If there is one thing I'm interested in seeing him do, it's a time travel film.  And look!  He's in one.

Spider-Man 3 (2007)

Okay, I know that I will most likely get confused stares and whatnot, but this is nowhere near as bad as everyone says it is.  Sure, it's the weakest out of the original trilogy, but it also has gotten so much hate when it's much better than the remake.  Spider-Man 3 is a pretty dumb film.  Yes I will admit that, but I had so much fun with this film.  Emo Parker sure was a weird, and the plot was convoluted.  And Ron Howard's daughter can't act.  And they still haven't killed off Kirsten Dunst.  BUT it does have a fair share of fun to it.  Yes, it's campy, but I kinda liked it.  It has the spidey charm and has some really good action sequences.  Plus, the soundtrack is probably the best soundtrack in superhero history.

Spider-Man 3 pits Spidey against not 1, not 2, but 3 villains, all of which are given some screen time.  Sandman is only in the film for the beginning, but disappears in the middle after a fatal fight with Spider-Man, but somehow he survived.  Venom appears at the end and they probably should have picked a better Eddie Brock, but I'm not gonna lie, that kid was pretty funny.  Then, we are given Hobgoblin.  I still believe James Franco should stick to comedy instead of drama, but he does have his comedic moments in this film making it somewhat better.  There is a fourth villain too.  A crane that smashes into a building, so that constitutes as a problem maker.

Unlike Spider-Man 1&2, this film focused more on special effects than the journey.  The knock on of the effects is that the whole film does feel quite superficial - something to be expected to a point from a summer multiplex filler but not something that should be embraced in the way it is here. The most glaring issue is the volume of characters in the film because this causes so many other problems. Flow-wise each of these characters has to be introduced and mostly this is done by handy coincidence and lazy writing; eg Venom hits Earth just as Parker is in the woods and doesn't jump him until he happens to be in his Spiderman suit, or how, guess what, now Marko killed your Uncle, or Eddie Brock happening to be in the church where Venom leaves Parker etc. One of these is forgivable but there are so many of them that it reveals the whole thing to be build on easy narrative devices that lack sense. The writing problems continue in the way that the theme of revenge is dealt with; it could have been a real strong base for the action but instead it is very superficial with no meat on the bones; the killer for me being when Harry forgave Peter simply because his butler said "oh yeah, forgot to mention, your Dad died of his own wounds - sorry for not mentioning it sooner", at that point I nearly laughed out loud.

Yeah, it is dumb, but I did like the fun charm and I can't say that I wasn't having fun.  I really enjoyed the first Sandman v. Spider-man fight.  It was fast paced, even though it did kind of get a little outlandish.  I mean, the guy was surfing on a metal car door.  Even for a movie about a spider giving a man spider-AIDS, that seems really out there.  However, the whole introduction to Black Spider-Man is pretty amazing, filled with visual grandeur, and a nicely themed song from Danny Elfman.  It was still better than anything TASM did and it's a shame that this franchise will never be as awesome.  I mean look at the new TASM trailer.  It looks like complete garbage, and focuses too much on an Avengers-esque destruction.  I think that what I loved about this trilogy the most.  It always contained the destruction in small places.  Here, it happens on a construction site, and no building (except the one that's being built) is blown up.  Listen, Marc Webb!  If you want to make a good Spider-Man film, follow Riami's formula.  Don't try to do all bullet-time effects and that.  Go for the campy fun Spidey.

Overall, yeah it sucks.   But it's a fun time.  I will admit:  I own this film on Blu ray, but not the other ones.  I just watched it today and thought "Man, people were really too harsh on this film."  Yes, I know this review contradicts my views on a perfect film, but I don't know what's with this film.  I just had a fun time watching it.  It really is a shame that more people prefer that garbage remake than this film.  Sam Riami, please make another superhero film.  Maybe, you can make Scorpion-Man or whatever.  This is the weakest in the original trilogy, but nowhere near as bad as TASM.

6.5/10

DragonBall: Evolution (2009)

DragonBall and DragonBall Z are one of the best shows to ever hit the small screen.  Every fight, though it got a little repetitive, was enhanced through the deep mythology.  It has it's moments of pure adrenaline fueled fights, and it's deeply comical views on the world around us.  DragonBall GT was a step in the wrong direction, but DragonBall Evolution pretty much ended the chance of an epic live-action transfer.  It takes everything I loved about DBZ and pretty much ignores it.  So much so, that it could've been labeled "Chinese Kung-Fu Beatdown" or "Shaolin  Kings" or any other kung fu movie title, and I would believe it is a different film.

The only star I recognized in this entire film prior to watching it was Chow Yun Fat as Master Roshi.  This was a weird casting decision because I love Fat, but he looks too young (even though he's like 50) to play Roshi.  I can say that he was the best part of this film because he had a certain likability to him that I was fond of.  Unfortunately, the script (which I don't want to think about) was atrocious and let him down immensely.  Then, let's move on to our Son-Goku.  Mr. Justin Chatwin.  I hate this guy.  Every line he delivers is bland.  This guy also doesn't understand Goku's character and plays him like an emo.  Every look he gives makes me want to cut myself.  It doesn't help that he can't drop a tear at all.  Also, his "Kamehameha" deliver is laughable at best.  Much better than the nerds who attempt it in real life, but still weak.

Guess what he's doing there?  Hint: It's not a Kamehameha.

Everything seemed rushed in the movie and characters would just pop out of nowhere and decide to join together to beat Piccolo. The love angle in the story seemed forced as well, everybody was simply out of character. Goku's a powerful but lame school boy, Chi Chi's a martial art school girl who can't even open her own locker, Master Roshi's some crazy dude living in the city (at least he still wears a Hawaiian shirt and seems a little perverted), Bulma became Lara Croft and Rambo combined in another body with a bizarre voice, Mai (originally one of Pilaf's hilarious henchmen in the manga) became a cold blooded, shape-shifting killer, Yamcha became a weird cross between a desert bandit who can't fight and a hobo with unwashed hair, and Piccolo became a weird vampire whose outfit seems to be inspired by the Matrix. I think only Grandpa Gohan was close enough to the original character, except for the way he exits the movie early on.

At some point of the movie, when Goku turns into a gorilla the visual effect was so poorly done that it looks some what like "Rubber Chicken". Did they slip in few shots done by stop motion? The face of Gozoru looks like it was done in After Effects, it doesn't look like 3D at all!! First scene of the film, Goku was training with Gohan, the matte painting of the house was so badly done that it looks 2D (cardboard stand) in the background. Blue / Green screen spill was all over, color correction sucks. Visual effect was done much like fresh grad student level. Hollywood have done so much super hero movies in the recent years, and I think the producers just hire the wrong bunch to do such a visual effects intensive film. I believe that Fox knew this film wouldn't go anywhere so they cut budget from hiring the good guys to work on this film!!!

As far as film-making and story-telling techniques go, you can see cliché after cliché being thrown at you, with the poorly and cheaply rendered special effects offering no consolation. Justin Chatwin's Goku is your typical teenager who possesses innate potential yet to be realized, and in his frustration he gets treated by peers as a loser geek. He lives with his grandpa Gohan (Randall Duk Kim in stereotypical know-it-all like in Kung Pu Panda), and develops a crush on school hottie Chi Chi (Jamie Chung). Goku's calling in life is to prevent an apocalypse from happening with the return of chief cardboard baddie Lord Piccolo (an instant shoo-in as one of the worst cinematic villains, ever!) and his temporary sidekick Mai (Eriko Tamura) who attempt to collect 7 dragonballs to fulfill an ancient myth. And of course Goku needs a Fellowship, in the form of irritating tech-wizard Bulma (Emmy Rossum last seen in the sinker Poseidon), mercenary Yum Cha (Joon Park who probably copied Rain's uninspiring cinematic turn in Speed Racer to a T) and as I mentioned above Chow Yun-Fat the biggest name of them all here trying his darnest best to act likable as Master Roshi, who imparts skills in double quick time to Goku.

 If you want to have endless conversation with your friends about how bad this film is, then go watch it. I believe that Hollywood is running out of idea and beginning to tackle Asia stories. But studio got to have more faith in selling these stories with huge fans around the world: Dragonball, Akira and whatnot. If you cut back the budget, it will end up with a disaster like what James Wong did with this movie! Consider Matrix, Wachowski Bros did a total ripe off from a Japanese Animation "Ghost in the Shell". Look what they can achieve with the budget they've got. Of course, skills is also a factor and they have better vision than James as well.

I'm being ultra-generous with a

0.5/10