Reaction & Review | A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to an all new Reaction & Review. Tonight, guys, I'm taking a look at the fourth entry in the "Nightmare on Elm Street" series which came out in 1988. That movie is "A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master".

Now, as has been the case with the previous films in this series, I really don't know a whole lot about it, aside from the fact that Robert Englund is still playing Freddy Krueger. I don't really know anything about the plot to this one, though I'm gonna take a guess here and say that Freddy is back doing his usual shtick. Now I'm not saying that as a bad thing, because I really have been enjoying these movies so far. And even though Nightmare 2 was definitely the weakest entry in the entire series so far, I still kinda enjoyed it for what it tried to do. Mind you, it didn't do it very well, but again, I still somewhat enjoyed that movie.

So now, I'm curious to see what this fourth movie is going to do here. I'm not sure if it's going to be any good, but I'm hoping for this one to be at least decent. Now I am also aware that when it comes to the 4th entry in a horror movie franchise, it's usually where the quality of the series will start to go downhill. But hey, you know what? If this one is at least better than "A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge", then this movie has already accomplished what it needs to do. Still though, I really want to see if this movie is any good at all. And the only way I'm gonna find that out is if I shut up and I push play, and I'm gonna do that right now. So, without further ado, it's time to kick back, relax, and check out "A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master".

9 minutes later

OK, I have sort of a big question here. Well, two technically, but I'm gonna ask them anyway. Why was this guy hanging on top of the smaller roof to begin with? And also, how long was he waiting there? Was he there before dawn, or was it shortly after? I know it's a really trivial thing to be asking, but I really am curious as to how long that guy was hiding in wait there. It just seems really odd to me, you know what I mean?

8 minutes later

OK, you know, out of all the things I was expecting from this movie, a dog pissing on the grave site where Freddy was buried, and is also opening to show the remains of his body, is not something I was quite expecting. Mind you, I have seen far weirder in this series, but that one is definitely new to me.

9 minutes later

All right, guys, I'm just gonna go ahead and say this right now. The acting from our two leading ladies here is fucking terrible. Mind you, Kristen was one of the main characters from the previous movie, but she's played by a completely different actress, and she sounds even worse here! I'll get a little more into that once I start covering this movie, but I'm just gonna let you guys know now that the acting from these two women really fucking suck.

14 minutes later

Well, guys, I believe I can say this much. Whether or not it was intentional, Kristen was right. Her mother is a fucking murderer. And I hope by the end of this movie that she dies a really painful death by Freddy Krueger. And if she somehow survives this, then I'm gonna be a little bit pissed. Just thought I'd let you guys know.

6 minutes later

OK, that was probably one of the more disturbing things I've seen from Krueger throughout these movies. Just kissing someone and sucking their air dry was, uh...definitely something, I'll say that much. But still, that was fucking disturbing as hell.

10 minutes later

All right, I have a big question here that's probably a bit late to be asking, but I'm still gonna ask it anyway. So, all of these kids from Kristen and her friends, to Alice's friend and brother, how the fuck has anyone not reported on any of this yet? You would think, by this point, that the media would've probably commented on these "mysterious deaths". My only reasoning as to why this hasn't happened yet is because the media is keeping silent about what happened during and after Freddy's trial. But even then, I still have to wonder why these deaths, which all have been occurring within probably the last few days, haven't been covered yet? Unless they have been reporting it off screen, then it's still kinda puzzling me as to why no one has been noticing all these recent deaths that have been going on at the high school that Alice has been attending. I don't know, *maybe* I'm just putting a little too much thought into this, but I'm still very curious about it.

14 minutes later

So, not only was the bad editing probably intentional, but also Deb apparently grew some bug arms after Freddy broke hers. I admit, I'm a little confused, but still, at least those new arms of her look sorta cool. Oh, and now we're looping the same scene of Alice coming around the diner and getting into Dan's truck. OK, so at least the obvious bad editing was intentional. Which, I gotta say, that's actually sorta creative to use bad editing like that. I'm actually kind of impressed.

1 minute later

Wait, so Alice and Dan finally realize that they're repeating the same events over and over again. But instead of coming up with a new plan of action, they're gonna do the exact same thing by getting in the car and driving to Deb's house! Oh my fucking god...you guys have no idea how stupid this movie is becoming. And yet, I still find it to be more interesting than Nightmare 2. Which I know will probably sound surprising, but I'm gonna get more into why later once I start reviewing this movie.

The Review

Well, guys, that was "A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master". Let me go ahead and shut the movie off here...OK. So, as I said earlier on, this movie had become stupid as shit the moment that Alice and Dan started to do the same thing again in their dreams. And yes, I still stand by that this movie is incredibly stupid. But also, I still find it to be more interesting than "A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge", which I still stand as the weakest film in the entire series so far.

Now with that, let's talk about this movie some more and explain why that is. Let's start with the writing. Now, without repeating myself about what I said in my review of Nightmare 3 about why Nightmare 2 was a worse movie in comparison, the reason why I find this 4th entry to be more interesting than the second movie revolves around a couple of things. For one, the creativity of all the kills in this movie is far more interesting than was shown in Freddy's Revenge, which barely had much of anything, outside of maybe one or two interesting moments in creativity. But aside from that, there really isn't much else there that I could say about that movie that was creative with it's kills. At least here, we have more of that. However, I'll get more into that later when I cover special effects.

The other reason why I find this movie to be more interesting is that, in a way, the plot is very similar to Nightmare 2 in which Freddy is using someone to help get him to his next victims. In Nightmare 2, Freddy used Jesse's body to get into the real world to kill his victims, which made no fucking sense because if he was able to pull that kind of shit off, then why didn't he do any of that in the first movie? It's stuff like that which makes Nightmare 2's story even more convoluted and stupid the more you try to think about it. As for this movie, well, admittedly, it's not really all that better because shortly before Freddy kills Kristen, Alice was able to get into the dreamworld because she apparently has a fascination for dreams herself. And after Freddy killed Kristen, her spirit, somehow, was able to transfer into Alice's body, which is somehow giving more of an awareness of sorts in regards to Freddy being nearby or something. Trust me, the explanation makes absolutely no sense at all, but even so, I still think the made up explanation is more plausible than how Nightmare 2 did it, even if it may not be saying very much.

And as for our characters, well, in regards to Freddy Krueger, he's starting to spew out cheesy one-liners which makes him sound more comical than frightening. Which, I understand may sound like something of a downgrade to his character, but I thought it actually added a lot of charm to it because, unlike Jason Voorhees or Michael Myers, he's not the silent killer type. He will say whatever's on his mind before or after he kills his victims, and I honestly would prefer that over just being a silent killer like Michael or Jason. But as for other characters, well, Kristen and her two friends from the previous movie carry on over here, though they're not in it for that long. Instead, we focus on Alice and her friends. While her friends are nothing to write home about, Alice is the one who gets the most focus on, and she actually has quite a bit of development in this movie. Granted, I wish her actress put in more effort, but I'll talk about her acting in a second. But anyway, Alice actually has some pretty good character development, especially when she starts to lose more of her friends to Freddy Krueger. It's pretty good stuff, and I'd say she stands out a little bit more than Kristen did in the previous movie. Not that Kristen wasn't likable or anything, I just feel like her character wasn't as strong as either Nancy or even Alice in this movie.

So yeah, Alice is actually pretty likable here, and also has some pretty good character development. The only other one I can think of that comes kinda close to it is her brother, Rick, because Rick was actually Kristen's girlfriend in this movie. And also, I didn't mention this beforehand, but Kristen and her friends were able to go to school again, so I'm going to guess that their therapy went well there. Not that it really matters in this movie for obvious reasons that I kinda already spoiled earlier. Whoops. Well, anyway, going back to Rick for a moment, as I was saying, he was Kristen's girlfriend, and he's sorta on the flipside on whether or not he believes Alice's story about how Freddy has actually come back and started killing everyone. And part of me thought that he was going to survive until the very end before he gets killed. Well, I was a bit off the mark there because, a bit of a spoiler here, he's one of the many victims Freddy gets in this movie. And they also sorta telegraphed it a little bit past the halfway mark of the film where he mentions to Dan that if he gets killed, then he better watch out next. So I guess I should've seen it coming sooner rather than later.

So, writing in this movie is definitely a step down from the third movie. Mind you, it's still leaps and bounds better than the 2nd film, though that's not saying very much considering there is a lot of stupidity in this movie. But still, the writing here is still decent for what it was trying to do. It's just, again, really fucking stupid at times. Now as for the acting, I am gonna say this much. The acting from most of this cast is still really good, the obvious being Robert Englund, especially now that he has more lines to work with than he did in the previous movies. However, that does bring me into talking about the two worst actresses in this film, both of which who play Alice and Kristen. I'm gonna start with Kristen's actress. To start with, as I mentioned a little while ago, she is played by a completely different actress in this movie, when in the last one, she was played by Patricia Arquette, who did a really good job playing Kristen there. In this one, however, she is played by, and I'm *not* kidding when I say this person's name, Tuesday Knight. I *wish* was kidding, guys, because that name sounds so fucking stupid that I almost laughed. And I could probably overlook all that if not for the fact that, again, her acting in this movie is completely terrible. She sounds very robotic and doesn't put in a whole lot of effort into emoting her lines.

The same can be said also for Alice's actress, who goes by the name of Lisa Wilcox, who does it much worse here because at least with Kristen, she wasn't in the movie for very long and you could kinda stomach it. You can't do that, however, with Lisa Wilcox, because you have to put up with her toneless robotic voice throughout the entire movie. It is *really* bad, and it's probably some of the worst acting I've heard from a lead actress, at least from a horror movie anyways. If I were to expand my horizons, I would say she's just as bad as Melanie Griffith was in "Cherry 2000". But in terms of just horror movies, this is easily one of the worst performances I have heard in quite a while. Mind you, physically, she can act. But in terms of her vocal work, it is fucking horrible. And if she's somehow in the next movie, I hope that she has at least improved on it. I mean, if Nancy Thompson's actress, and the actors from the third movie could make a return, then why not Alice as well? I don't know, but I'll find that out whenever I get to covering the fifth movie, which won't be anytime soon, mind you, but still, I'll hopefully be able to cover it at some point. But anyway, minus our two leading actresses, the rest of the acting here is fine enough.

Special effects in this movie are absolutely amazing for low budget standards. In fact, I will go on record and say that, for the most part, the special effects in these movies have been amazing. They have always been consistent with each film, and even though the kills in Freddy's Revenge weren't really that great, the effects in that movie were still top notch. So, even though the quality of the movie's writing may vary, the effects have, so far, been consistently great. The blood effects here are awesome, the makeup effects are also really good, too. The best effect happens during the final battle between Alice and Freddy, and at one point, you get to see all of the heads that are kinda sorta meshed together on Freddy's stomach. It's pretty nasty to look at, but effects wise, it's great. So yeah, I can definitely say all the special effects here are fantastic.

Camerawork here is really good. Lighting is lit very well. The sound-mixing here is good. The music in this movie is also really good, too. One thing I didn't notice until I just looked it up is that one of the songs of this movie, mainly the opening song, was sung by Kristen's actress Tuesday Knight. And it actually is really good. Which makes me wonder why someone thought she would make a good actress in this movie despite the fact that she can't act here. My only theory is that they couldn't get back Patricia Arquette to reprise her role and, conveniently enough, Tuesday Knight looked a lot like her to take over her spot. Mind you, I'm just theorizing there, but that's my only explanation that I have for it. Anyway, while she can't act in this movie, she's a pretty good singer and I think she should stick to what she actually knows. Though that's just my own personal advice. But setting aside all that, the music here is really good, both in score and soundtrack.

So ultimately, guys, when all is said and done, am I able to recommend "A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master". Yes, I can mostly certainly recommend this one to you guys. While it's nowhere near as good as the first and third movie, it's still a pretty good film on it's own standards. While there are some stupid moments that happen in this movie, it's not something that's going to ultimately effect your viewing experience. It's still pretty good overall, and it's certainly much better than "A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge", which I know will sound like I'm beginning to hate that movie, which I still don't, but so far, I can definitely say that it's the weakest film in the entire series so far. I've heard the sequels after 4 go down in quality, but I'll find that out for myself the next time I end up covering the rest of these movies. Which probably won't be anytime soon, but I can at least say that if you can find these movies anywhere on DVD, preferably the 4 movie combo pack has the first 4 movies, or if there's another combo pack on Blu-ray that might hold the rest of the movies, then go ahead and pick them up somewhere, as long as it's for cheap. But yeah, I can say that I certainly enjoyed the first 4 movies, some to varying degree, but I won't dwell on that any further. For now, I'm gonna go and do something else. In fact, now that I'm thinking about it, I still have my copy of "Bye Sweet Carole" that I own on my Nintendo Switch. I'm gonna go back and play more of it because I've had a bit of a backlog in my gaming library that I haven't gotten back around to in a while, so I'm gonna go do that next and this 4 pack will definitely have a nice spot on my DVD shelf somewhere.

And with that, guys, we come to the close of another Reaction & Review. Until next time, ladies and gentlemen, take care, and I will see you all later. Peace.

Reaction & Review | Underworld: Awakening

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to an all new Reaction & Review. Tonight, guys, I'm gonna be covering a horror movie from 2012. That movie is "Underworld: Awakening".

Now before I actually talk about what I know about this movie, I'm first gonna let you guys know that I haven't really been all that impressed by this series. Mind you, I'm not saying that these movies have been bad per se, it's just that they all have been rather average at best. The first two movies didn't really make a whole lot of sense. The third movie actually lucked out by being pretty good despite being a prequel. So there is a chance that this movie could actually be really good. And if it's good enough, I may end up checking it's fifth entry at some point. I can't promise it'll be soon, because this movie is the last in the 4 movie combo pack that I bought, and I don't own a copy of the fifth movie yet. So I'm not even sure if I'll ever even pick up a copy unless it was dirt cheap, or if this movie will interest me enough to want to check out it's fifth entry.

I've also noticed a pattern with each film that I go through. And that pattern is that each film in this series has gotten a shorter runtime. The first movie was roughly about 2 hours long, the second movie was about 15 minutes shorter, the third movie was just about an hour and a half long, and this film is 3 minutes shorter than that. I have no idea that's gonna be a good thing or not, however, I will say that at least this movie will be a breeze to get through. At least, theoretically, anyways.

But like I said, I'm hoping that this one will be good, or interest me enough to want to continue watching the rest of this series. I don't know if it actually will end up doing that, but there is only one way for me to find out. And that is if I shut up and I push play, and I'm gonna do that right now. So, without further ado, it's time to kick back, relax, and check out "Underworld: Awakening".

12 minutes later

OK, that was actually really impressive. I liked how Selene was able to use a single knife to slice through all of the armed guards at once like that. That was actually pretty cool.

15 minutes later

O...K, so this girl that Selene and the other guy found is also a vampire. And she also ripped off a lycan's head in half. That was certainly impressive. Wasn't really expecting that, but still, it was rather impressive.

15 minutes later

All right, I have a question here that I'm not sure will get answered, but I'm gonna ask it anyway. Now, I will say that while it's sweet to see Selene and this girl bonding, I have to ask; what happened to Michael? I know that this movie claims that he died 12 years ago after Selene went to get him from drowning, but the last time I made this assumption about Michael being dead was back during "Underworld: Evolution", and I was totally wrong about that. Now I'm not saying that it's impossible that Michael is actually dead, and unless he doesn't show up alive for the remainder of this movie, then I'm not gonna buy this idea that Michael is dead until proven otherwise.

6 minutes later

OK, so...we got a much bigger lycan than usual. Granted, I always thought they were kinda average in size, despite being werewolves. But this one is definitely much bigger than I anticipated. That's certainly something new, at least.

30 seconds later

Oh, and this one also has Wolverine's healing factor, too. Again, wasn't really expecting that. I might have a theory about this one, but I'll hold it off until later.

14 minutes later

So these guys are not just scientific assholes, but they're also Lycan scientific assholes. Well, I shouldn't be surprised by any of this, but then again, no matter if they were human or lycan, scientists are still evil. At least that's what this movie proved to me, anyway.

9 minutes later

Well, guys, I called it. I said that I wouldn't have solid proof that Michael is dead until I see it for myself. And well...he's not dead. Just frozen in cryogenic status. Still though, I did call that he's not technically dead. So, yay me.

The Review

Well, guys, that was "Underworld: Awakening". Let me go ahead and shut the movie off here...OK. Well, I am gonna say this much, guys, I am a little bit surprised here. Part of me thought this movie was just gonna be another same as usual kind of story when it comes to the "Underworld" franchise, where it will be just another battle between the vampires and lycans. And while that, admittedly, was sort of true for this movie also, at least it does it. in a way. to where it me kept interested in what was happening. Which is more than what I can say about the first couple of movies in this series.

And on that note, let's just dive right into the writing here. And I first want to discuss why I wasn't a fan of the first two movies. And really, the biggest reason I can think of is simply because I didn't care for the war between the vampires and lycans. Especially with how it was being presented in the first movie where you don't know who you're suppose to care for and why they should matter. It really made both sides look terrible, and even though the third film did kinda establish Lucien's reasoning for wanting to fight back against the vampires, the film really only catered to one side. And in retrospect, you would think that it would make the lycans the good guys in all this, right? Well, a bit of a spoiler for this movie, no it doesn't. Because the film goes back to establishing that the lycans are the bad guys and the vampires the underdog good guys. And I kinda wish this series would make up it's own mind on it's species status because they really like to flip-flop between the two, which makes the whole thing really confusing, assuming you even attempt to think about any of that to begin with.

But I am gonna say that, while this movie is indeed flawed, the writing here is actually pretty good. And what makes it a little more interesting is that, unlike the first two movies, where it felt like it ended on a conclusion of sort, this one ends on a sequel hook, which, I'll be honest, I am somewhat looking forward to seeing it all continue. I don't want to say it ends, because there is a possibility that there could be another sequel, however, considering that the next film in the series was last released in 2016, I kinda doubt it. Although I could be wrong there. But that's just me theorizing, I should get back to talking about this movie. Anyway, setting aside the ending here, the movie actually picks up from 12 years later after Selene gets ambushed while trying to save Michael. And I should mention that the world itself changed to where lycans and vampires were being hunted down by the government and treating like it's some kind of epidemic. At least, that's what we're told on the surface. Obviously, when you involve scientists and vaccines into the mix, you know the kind of shit you're getting yourself into when it's obviously more to it than that. It's cliche, but at least it's still done partially well here.

As for our characters, well, Selene is back as our main character after taking a hiatus from the third movie, and she's back looking for Michael after she escapes her 12 year containment. And I honestly think she really hasn't changed much of her personality. And normally, I would say that this would make her character bland, but honestly, at this point, I don't think a change in her personality is really necessary anymore. That'd be like if I was asking for a change in D's character from "Vampire Hunter D". It's just not gonna happen. At this point, she is aware of how slowly the world has changed and she doesn't know who's in the right or wrong here, but she does have a goal in mind, which is to protect this girl that she and another vampire find after they fend off a bunch of wild lycans. I won't spoil much about this new girl, but I will say that it's not really that surprising once you figure out who she is, since the movie doesn't really telegraph this very well.

But anyway, as for Michael, well, as I called earlier, he wasn't actually dead this entire time, just frozen. Mind you, he's still out for a majority of this movie and, thanks to the sequel hook at the end, this probably isn't the last time that we actually see him. Which, honestly, I'm hoping that they do something interesting with him beyond just being a hybrid vampire/lycan. I say this, because in the first two movies, Michael was an incredibly boring character with nothing special about him. I gave him a pass in the first movie because he was dragged into it by accident. But by the second movie, I honestly had no reason to care for him. Even when I eventually learned more about this character, his personality is as stale as open bread. So hopefully, by the time I eventually end up covering the fifth movie, I'm hoping that Michael is more interesting there than how he was in his first two outings. As for other characters, well, a lot of them are really not that interesting. The most you're gonna focus on is Selene, which makes sense, given that she is the main character and all. The only one I can mention by name is Detective Sebastian, because he kinda has his own personal stake in all this. Again, I won't spoil what, so I'll leave it to the side for this review.

Ultimately, guys, the writing here, while still following the same status quo as the first two movies did, is still pretty good. And if you were a fan of the previous movies, then you're gonna probably adore this one also. It has everything that was in the previous films with little to no changes, and this film is no exception. As for the acting, well, Kate Beckinsale's back in the role of Selene, and she does a great job here. Even after a 6 year absence in-between the second film and this one, she hasn't lost a step here. Which is great to see. In fact, the acting from the entire cast here is really good. Even though some of them may not have much in terms of character development, they still turn in a rather good showing for what they had to work with. Which is definitely a plus I can give this movie.

Special effects, on the other hand, are, well...kind of a mixed bag. In terms of blood effects, it has the same problem as the other movies in which it incorporates CG blood, and it still looks fucking terrible here. That being said, however, I will say that the gore effects, when viewed up close on certain scenes, like when the girl I mentioned earlier splits open a lycan's head in half, that actually looked pretty decent. Speaking of lycan's, I will say that the CG on them looks okay...at least until you see humans morph into them, which looks awful. And it doesn't matter what scene it is, it's any scene where they do this sort of thing, and it's probably some of the worst-looking CG I have seen in these movies up to this point. In fact, I've kinda noticed that ever since "Underworld: Evolution", the CG has gotten steadily worse. I'm hoping that by the time I cover the fifth movie, they will have rectified that in some way. I somewhat doubt it, but there's always a chance that it could happen. So yeah, the special effects, at least when it comes to the CG is a huge mixed bag here.

Camerawork here is pretty good, lighting here is lit well enough, the sound-mixing here is good, and the score here is also just very average. I can't really say anything more than that when it comes to the film's technical work.

So, when all is said and done, guys, am I able to recommend "Underworld: Awakening"? If you have seen the previous 3 movies in this series and you enjoyed them, then I have no doubt that you're gonna enjoy this one as well. It has pretty much all of the same tropes you've come to expect from the previous films with very little changes added to it. And as for myself, well, I will still say that I am pleasantly surprised on how this film was pretty good. It's not amazing, but then again, none of these movies have been amazing to me, so it's maybe just my own personal bias. Still though, I did enjoy this movie enough to consider covering the fifth movie, which is, I believe, called "Underworld: Blood Wars" at some point. It's not gonna be anytime soon, mind you, as there are other movies that peek my interest a lot more than that film does. But still, I'm curious to see what they can do with a fifth entry. Perhaps maybe it'll conclude the series on a positive note. I don't know. Until then, however, I'm gonna go and watch another vampire-esque movie in the form of "Vampire Hunter D", which is what I'm gonna go do next after I get done with this review.

Anyway, guys, with that, we come to the close of another Reaction & Review. Until next time, ladies and gentlemen, take care, and I will see you all later. Peace.

Reaction & Review | A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to an all new Reaction & Review. Tonight, guys, I'm continuing the "Nightmare on Elm Street" series by taking a look at the third entry that came out in 1987. That movie is "A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors".

Now, I really wish I could tell you guys everything I know about this movie, guys, but outside of it being it the third film in the series, along with Robert Englund reprising his role as Freddy Krueger, I really don't know much about it. I can tell you, guys, though, that if you read my review for the second "Nightmare on Elm Street" movie, I wasn't exactly a big fan of it. Now mind you, I didn't hate the movie. In fact, I still think it's worth watching for Freddy Krueger alone, even though he doesn't really appear all that much there beyond the third act. Also, his plan was riddled with logic issues that if you attempted to poke holes in it, your mind would hurt like hell.

So, that being said, the only thing I'm really gonna ask out of this third entry is for it to hopefully be better than the 2nd one. Which probably shouldn't be too hard to do, however, I wouldn't be surprised if this film found a way to be just as stupid as the 2nd movie was. Hopefully this one won't suck, but I won't know for sure whether or not this thing is any good at all unless I shut up and I push play, and I'm gonna do that right now. So, without further ado, it's time to kick back, relax, and check out "A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors".

13 minutes later

OK, I was gonna ask whether or not that was actually Nancy Thompson, but holy shit, it actually is her! Granted, I have a mountain of questions about her appearance here, but you know what, I'm gonna let that slide for now and see what this movie does with her here. Still though, I'm glad she's still doing okay, given everything that she's been through.

9 minutes later

OK, well, now that I'm getting a better look at this, well, let's call it a "Freddy Snake", I gotta say, that looked really fucking creepy and I would never want to be anywhere inside it's body if it ever tried to eat me. I will say, though, it's far more creative than was shown in the previous movie. So, at least that's something.

8 minutes later

Wait, so the black kid realizes his friend is "sleepwalking". But instead of actually stopping him or attempting to wake him up, he decides to go back to sleep as if it's nothing unusual. Dude, you realize that you're in a mental institution for a fucking reason, right?! Get off your sleepy ass and actually stop your friend! Jesus Christ...

9 minutes later

All right, that was really funny. I was curious to find out what Zsa Zsa Gabor's role was gonna be in all this, and that was actually a really creative use for her appearance in this film. That was really cool.

1 minute later

OK...that was probably the most creative death I've seen so far in this series. It was simple, but very effective. I loved it.

11 minutes later

All right, I was gonna bring up the fact that while most of these dreams that these kids can do are a little cool, I was gonna ask about Joey's disappearance and, well, let's just say that he's tied up at the moment. And with tongue's, too. Not something I get to say very often, but it is indeed a first.

19 minutes later

OK, I have another question here. So, Nancy has taken the kids somewhere in a different room, even though she was told earlier by one of the medical guy's that she only has 5 minutes to say goodbye to them. When is he gonna realize that it's been more than the allotted time that Nancy was given and tries to go look for them? I understand that it's probably not that important, but I feel like if Nancy had been given that short amount of time, then he probably would already try to look for her and wake her up, and maybe actually believe the nightmares that these kids have been having are actually real. Again, it's not really as important as I'm making it out to be, but it's just something that I still wanted to bring up is all.

The Review

Well, guys, that was "A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors". Let me go ahead and shut the movie off here...OK. So, before I talk about the movie itself, I am going to state upfront that I really enjoyed this movie. Now is it as good as the first movie? Oh, hell no, not even close. Though in fairness, it's hard to top how great the first "Nightmare on Elm Street" film really was. I will say this much though. Not only was this film good, it makes the second film look a hell of a ton worse in comparison.

So with that said, let's go right into the writing here and first talk about why this film makes the second movie worse in comparison. Now, in my review of Nightmare 2, I asked a question that really didn't make any sense because of that movie's subtitle, which was what is Freddy getting revenge for? It's never explained out right, nor do they ever explain why he had to use Jesse, the main character from the second film, in order for Freddy to go on a massive killing spree again. Nothing about it made any sense, and what's even worse about it is that this film doesn't even acknowledge Jesse at all, in any shape or form. Which makes me wonder what the hell the writers were thinking when they even wrote that script in the first place? Now mind you, I still think Nightmare 2 is decent as long you don't try to poke holes into it's writing, but if you watch this film at all and weren't a fan of Nightmare 2, then I can almost guarantee that you're going to hate the second movie even more because of how well executed the writing in Nightmare 3 is in comparison.

Which brings me into the writing for this third entry, because the writing in this film is really solid. Not just because they bring back Nancy Thompson from the first movie, but they actually have a decent sized cast of characters that actually have some kind of depth and personality to them. Now granted, there is also some characters that are just unlikable, such as the doctors who run the mental institution because they're completely ignorant as to why these kids are being killed from their nightmares. They just write it off as some kind of "inner sin" or some such bullshit doctors like to make up at times. But anyway, our characters here are developed very well, even if they may be a little bit shallow at times, such as one of them doesn't talk very much or one of them is a paraplegic who's into D&D. That kind of stuff. But they're still very likable, and you do care about them as the movie progresses.

There is one character that I wanted to bring up, which is the nun that appears sporadically in this film. Now, I'm gonna try not to spoil very much here, because some of this involves more about Freddy Krueger's backstory, and even though the film is nearly 40 years old at this point, I'm still going to do my best not to spoil anything. So, as I already said, this nun in white appears sporadically throughout the entire movie and only Neil can see her. Don't know why he can only see her, but that's not really important. Anyway, she brings up to him about Freddy's origin and how to seal him away once and for all. And for a long time, you really don't know *anything* about this nun up until they spell it out for you in the end. Which may seem a little bit forced in, but it's still pretty well built up even though Neil only sees her from his point of view.

And I should also mention one other thing about writing that I neglected earlier, which is all these kids in the mental institution are all linked to each other, because they are also the kids of the parents who ended up killing Freddy Krueger in the first place, and it's said that he's out for revenge against all of the parents kids as part of their sin. And somehow, these kids are the last ones of the parents that are still alive. Which raises a bunch of questions, specifically, if these kids are all killed at some point in future sequels, then what does that leave Freddy? Well, I don't really know, because there's at least 4 other movies in this series. One of which I've already seen, ala "Freddy vs. Jason". But barring that, I'm curious to see how Krueger changes up his killing spree in future installments. I already know how it *ends* for him in "Freddy vs. Jason", but I'm curious as to the lead up in all that, though.

So anyway, the writing here is very strong. And again, it makes "A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge" even worse in comparison because of all the illogical bullshit that happens in that movie without ever explaining anything. And while there is a couple of things here that are left kinda vague, it's still strong enough to where you can overlook those minor flaws because the rest of the writing is that strong. Now, as for the acting, well, most of the acting here is pretty good, save for the actress who plays Jennifer, who turns in the worst showing here. And what's really ironic about her is that her character in this movie wants to become an actress on TV once she leaves the psychiatric hospital. Well, I'm kinda glad her character was killed off early because, if she had stayed longer in the movie, it would've sorta brought the film down a bit because of her shit acting. Outside of her, however, the rest of the acting is mostly decent. Once more, Robert Englund, is great as Krueger himself. And Nancy's actress also reprises her role here too and, while it's not as good as it was in the first "Nightmare on Elm Street" movie, it's still pretty good on it's own standards. So yeah, the acting here is mostly pretty good.

Special effects in this movie are mostly awesome. And if you were someone like me who felt like Nightmare 2 was sort of a letdown in terms of creative kills done by Freddy Krueger, this movie will ramp it back up once again and there's a lot here that's very creative. The TV kill was awesome and I still stand by that as the best kill of the entire series so far, and there's also a lot of practical blood effects as well. Some of the backgrounds, mainly the one where Joey's suppose to be hanging above a hospital which leads into a pit of fire looks a little bit dated, but it still looks pretty decent for 1987 standards. Costuming here is really good, mainly for Freddy, although I don't think it's as necessary to bring up anymore unless they changed it in some way that might get my attention. But regardless, the costuming is really solid.

This movie also utilizes something new here, which is stop-motion. There is quite a bit of stop-motion animation in this movie, and most of it looks really good...until you get to the skeleton fight. Now, I'm not gonna spoil too much here about the context of how that all makes sense, but I will say that while the fight sequence is here is done halfway decently, it's the movement on the skeleton that doesn't look right. And there's also an instance where it's suppose to lift a person up. But the grip that's holding the person is kinda off by a little bit, and it just doesn't look that believable. It doesn't look like a fist that's pretending to grab someone, it looks more like he's lifting that person by punching them. Now mind you, again, the fight sequence itself isn't that bad, but the movements on the skeleton itself just doesn't look very good. But the rest of the stop-motion here is very solid, so one bad piece of stop-motion isn't going to ruin the film in any way.

Camerawork here is really good. The lighting here is lit very well. Sound-mixing here is good. The music here is also very good, too. It's nothing ultra special, but at least it gets the job done. So the technical work here is all satisfactory.

Ultimately, guys, when everything is said and done, am I able to recommend "A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors". Oh, most certainly, guys. This movie is great. At least, in comparison to "A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge". In comparison to the first movie, well, it's very hard to top the first movie's amazing impact. But on it's own standards, it's a really solid movie. And if you haven't seen it yet, then I would highly recommend checking it out for yourself, especially if you've seen the previous two movies and you want to see how the third one stands out. I almost want to say that you could even skip the second movie entirely and you wouldn't miss a thing because none of it carries over into the third movie. But again, I still think there is merit to Nightmare 2 as long as, again, you don't poke holes into it's very flawed story. But yeah, guys, I can totally recommend "A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors". It's a really good movie. Now, with that being said, I'm gonna go and watch something else. And seeing as how I'm still in the middle of watching this series, I think I'm gonna go back and rewatch another film I covered almost last year, which is the first "Critters" movie. I'm gonna go do that next as soon as I get done with this review.

Anyway, guys, with that, we come to the close of another Reaction & Review. Until next time, ladies and gentlemen, take care, and I will see you all later. Peace.

Reaction & Review | Underworld: Rise of the Lycans

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to an all new Reaction & Review. Tonight, guys, I'm gonna be gonna be covering a horror movie from 2009. That movie is "Underworld: Rise of the Lycans".

Now this movie I do know is a prequel to the first "Underworld" movie. And I didn't even have to look it up to find that out because the back of the DVD case for this combo pack advertises this film as a prequel to the "Underworld" franchise. And just based on the surname, I'm going to assume this is suppose show how exactly we get our war between the between the vampires and the lycans. Which could be interesting, however, the past two movies of this series haven't really been all that great. Not terrible, mind you, just kinda itching on being sorta average.

That being said, however, this movie could pull off a "Puppet Master 3" situation in which the prequel of your movie ends up being really solid. Because in case you're new to this series, "Puppet Master 3: Toulon's Revenge" is my favorite "Puppet Master" movie and it was also a prequel to the entire series. And it was a damn awesome prequel, too. And this movie could pull off that same kind of miracle with itself. Though as to whether or not it can actually do that remains to be seen. So I may as well see for myself if this movie will actually surprise me and wind up being really awesome. And the only way I'm gonna find out is if I shut up and I push play, and I'm gonna do that right now. So, without further ado, it's time to kick back, relax, and check out "Underworld: Rise of the Lycans".

14 minutes later

OK, I have a question here. How long did it take for Lucien and Sonja to fall in love with each other? Because earlier, the last time these two interacted with each other is when Lucien saved Sonja from a pair of wild lycans. Except, the way Sonja talked to him really didn't seem like it was, in a way, where she was grateful to him. It was more sarcastic than anything else. And yet, now when they're meeting alone, they're suddenly making out with each other. Again, it leads me to ask how long did it take for them to fall in love with one another? Better yet, how long have they been having this secret relationship with each other? I'm really starting to get curious now, guys.

8 minutes later

I didn't think this was possible, guys, but somehow, the CG has gotten worse here than it did in "Underworld: Evolution". And it, once more, has to do with the awful blood effects. I didn't think that was actually possible, but somehow, this movie has already pulled that off. Wow...

20 minutes later

By the way, guys, the suitwork on these lycans look just as horrible as the digital blood effects in this movie because they just look like dudes in obvious wolf costumes. Mind you, the story here is actually not too bad so far, it's just I can't quite get over how bad the special effects are in this movie, guys. That's actually kinda surprising.

1 minute later

OK, you know what? This douchebag who lashed at Lucien earlier is finally getting what's coming to him. I'm actually A-OK with this.

12 minutes later

All right, I probably should've picked up on this at least two movies ago, but apparently, whenever a vampire, more specifically Viktor, bites someone, he can apparently see visions into their own past. I will admit, it probably doesn't make much sense, seeing as how I would think that the moment a vampire bites you, then you turn into a vampire yourself. But seeing as how this series has done this kind of thing already, I probably should've picked up on it more sooner than I could've.

The Review

Well, guys, that was "Underworld: Rise of the Lycans". Let me go ahead and shut the movie off here...OK. So, I mentioned before that maybe this movie could pull off what "Puppet Master 3" did with it's series by being the best one in the series, and were both prequels as well. And you know what? It actually worked here. This movie was actually pretty good. Mind you, that's not a very high bar to pass considering the previous two movies were pretty average at best. But still, what is here is still pretty solid. I'm actually kinda surprised by that, actually.

Why don't we go ahead and start this review off as usual by first talking about the writing. Now the story here is pretty much what the subtitle suggests. This is a prequel to the first "Underworld" movie, and it follows Lucien's fall and rise as a lycan slave. He frees other slaves that were also turned into lycans and also falls in love with Viktor's daughter, Sonja, who's also a vampire. Now of course if you have been following these movies up till this point, you pretty much know what's going to happen to Sonja. It's not really a huge spoiler since they pretty much let you know that she's going to die, which would trigger the inner beast in Lucien. And I'm gonna say, again, that the story here is actually very easy to follow, and you're not really boggled down by anything that might be considered pointless filler.

Another thing this movie excels at is pacing. In the previous two films, both movies suffered from really rough pacing issues. More so the first movie than the second, but that isn't to say that the second didn't have it's own pacing problems either. This film, however, is able to handle it's own pace pretty well. Now despite this movie being about an hour and a half long, it's really only about 82 minutes long if you don't count the 10 minutes or so of credits that appear afterwards. Still though, the pacing here is really tight and it does keep the story going without it slowing down very much. There is a couple of moments where the movie might slow down, but it's not to a point where it kills the momentum of the movie's pacing. It still keeps going, enough to where it doesn't rush itself either. This is one of the better paced movies I have seen in this series in quite a while.

Our characters here are fleshed out, and seeing as it focuses on Lucien's past, you do get to see more of his character here, where in the first movie, his character motivation was really confusing and you have no idea if you're suppose to care for him or not. I mean, the same could be said for the vampires as well, but that's besides the point. In this movie, they make it clear that the vampires are more antagonistic while the lycans are more the underdog heroes. And Lucien is someone that you can definitely care for, as he tries to free all the slaves while trying to make it out with Sonja. Obviously, the latter is not going to happen. But again, if you have seen the other two movies, then it's bound to happen naturally. And even though I could ask how long she and Lucien have been secretly seeing each other without Viktor or anyone else noticing, she is still at least likable and can hold her own as a fighter herself. At least, for the most part, anyway.

So yeah, guys, despite some minor quirks here and there, the writing here is pretty solid. Like I said, the story is very easy to follow and it has very tight pacing, so it'll be an easy breeze to get through. And to add onto that, the acting here is mostly really solid. The one actor who I have an issue with is the black actor who's voice sounds very...odd. See, I'm not sure if it's the range of his voice, or if he's just putting on some kind of accent, but for whatever reason, he sounds very quiet whenever he talks. And a lot of times, you can barely make out what he's trying to say. On rare occasions, you can *kinda* make out some of his dialogue, but his voice just sounds so weirdly quiet that I can barely make out what he's trying to say. Now yes, I could also put part of the blame on this for the sound-mixing, but it's kind of hard to do so when just about every other actor's dialogue is easy to pick up on. So on this occasion, I'm gonna put the blame on this for the direction for his character here. But like I was saying, every actor here turns in a great showing. So, despite one mishap, the acting here is very solid.

Special effects, however, are pretty terrible. In fact, I would still say that they're worse here than how they were implemented in the previous movie. In the previous film, it was mainly just the usage of digital blood. Well, this film has the exact same problem, but I feel like it's worse here because a lot of it looks really fucking cheap. And I want to emphasize again that it's really only for CG blood. The practical blood that's used here is decent, but the CG blood here, especially when there's blood splatter, looks terrible. Another issue is the costuming on the lycans. Because when you see a lot of them up close in some scenes, they look like guys in obvious wolf masks. And the body costuming looks just as awful as well. Now when the lycans are in CG, it's not as big of an issue, because most of them are seen from further away and they don't look that obvious. Granted, the CG on them isn't that great either, but it still looks better when you don't have to view them up close because they look really shitty.

That aside, I will say that the costuming on our other actors look really good. And the sets look great as well, as the castle looks like something that you would see from a dark fantasy story come to life. Which is great to see. Camerawork here is really solid. The lighting here is very good. The sound-mixing here is competent. And the score is also very good, too. Again, it helps bring the dark mood of the movie, which was obviously the intention. So yeah, technical work here is top notch.

Ultimately, guys, when everything is said and done, am I able to recommend "Underworld: Rise of the Lycans"? You know what, I'm actually going to say yes here. Because, like I've already said, we have a pretty good story that is easy to follow and you have characters who you can actually care about. And also, the acting is mostly really solid as well. So on that end, I would say it's worth a watch. If you were a fan of the previous "Underworld" movies, then I would say that it's worth checking out, especially if you are curious to find out how this whole thing started. As for myself, I quite enjoyed this movie. I'm not sure if it's something that I would rewatch again, but I can say at least that I have some interest going into the 4th movie. So I'll be ready for that one when I get to it very soon. For now, though, I'm gonna go and attempt to watch "Puppet Master III: Toulon's Revenge" again. Because I was still pissed about it not playing beforehand. But I'm curious now to see if it has changed at all. I'm hoping so, anyway.

But anyways, guys, with that, we come to the close of another Reaction & Review. Until next time, ladies and gentlemen, take care, and I will see you all later. Peace.

Reaction & Review | A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to an all new Reaction & Review. Tonight, guys, we continue with the "Nightmare on Elm Street" series by taking a look at the second entry that came out in 1985. That movie "A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge".

Now, for those of you reading this for the first time, I reviewed the first "Nightmare on Elm Street" movie last week, and I ended up loving it. I hadn't seen any of the "Nightmare on Elm Street" films until then, and I'm happy to see that the first film still holds up really well today. At least, to me, it does.

So now, we're on to the second movie, and this is where I have to bring up something to you guys. You see, when I did my Reaction & Review on "A Nightmare on Elm Street", I mentioned that while the first film is almost universally loved by fans, I haven't heard very much about the sequels from them. And in the case of the second movie, I've heard one person in particular say that it's the worst entry in the entire series. Which is a bold claim to make because, usually, when it comes to horror movie sequels, most of them won't usually start to degrade in quality until the 4th or 5th movie of their franchise, assuming they even make it that far. It happened with the "Phantasm" series, it happened with "Wishmaster", "Puppet Master" came out unscathed from it, and "Killjoy" was just unwatchable from the first two movies alone.

So, while it is possible that this movie could still suck, I'm curious to find out if it's really as bad as that person has made it out to be. I'm hoping that it's still pretty good, or at least decent, but I won't know for sure yet, unless I shut up and I push play, and I'm gonna do that right now. So, without further ado, ladies and gentlemen, it's time to kick back relax, and check out "A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge".

6 minutes later

Wait, so upon hearing their son, Jesse, screaming after waking up from Freddy's nightmare, the parents don't even bother to check up on him to ask if he's okay or anything? What the fuck is wrong with them?! I mean, they just act so casual about it, too. 'Oh, he's just having a nightmare'. Like, seriously? Even if this is somehow a common occurrence, you should still at least check up on him to see if he's okay! Jesus...we're not even 10 minutes into the movie yet and I've already run into a logic issue. Though for now, I'll just pass this off as bad parenting on their part.

10 minutes later

OK, so they *now* decide to check up on him after Jesse woke up a second time. All right, well, at least they seem concerned for him, so I'll take back what I said about their bad parenting. At least, for now, anyway.

2 minutes later

OK, I have a question here. How often is it that classrooms kept snakes as pets in school? I'm only asking because I genuinely thought that snake was part of Jesse's dream, but nope, somehow, someone was able to put a snake on him without getting caught by the teacher. Just seems kinda weird to me, you know what I mean?

4 minutes later

Wait, so Nancy Thompson, the main character of the first movie, left her diary in the home of where she formerly stayed at. I should mention, by the way, that Jesse now occupies her room after Nancy's family, I guess, either moved out or was killed by Freddy Krueger. I don't know which, to be exact, but the fact that her diary was left behind just seems really odd to me.

8 minutes later

OK...well, I was gonna comment about how kinda stupid this scene was...and then that bird just fucking exploded. I gotta say, that's certainly something different. Not totally what I was expecting, but at least it's something new.

13 minutes later

OK, I have another question here that I'm not sure will actually get answered or not, but I'm still gonna ask it anyway. So, Jesse's father knew about what happened to Nancy and her family after Jesse's family bought the house. And it's been stated at least a couple of times already that Nancy lost her mind and her mother "killed herself", in a matter of speaking. I'm not gonna go into the latter issue, because it's obvious what actually happened to her. But what exactly happened to Nancy, apart from "losing her mind"? Did she take her own life sometime after the first movie or did she get institutionalized at some point? I'm really curious about this, guys, and I'm not sure if the movie's ever gonna explain that at all. It should, but I don't know if the film's actually going to address that.

16 minutes later

Well, guys, um...even though this movie has been a little on the dull side, I will say that the effects here are still really fucking good. And also, I was gonna comment on Freddy not being in the movie for quite a while, even though it has his name in the title, until he actually did that by coming out of Jesse's body in a really cool and gruesome way. So, at least this movie's starting to get interesting again.

The Review

Well, guys, that was "A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge". Let me go ahead and shut the movie off now...OK. So, um...where to even start here? Well, I suppose I can say this much. This movie is definitely nowhere near as good as the first movie was. Now is it as awful as I've heard it was? Well, I wouldn't go that far. At least, not until I've seen more of these movies. But at least in comparison to the first one, I would say the first trumps this film easily, no questions asked.

Why don't we just start by talking about the movie itself here. I'm gonna start with writing. And the first thing I need to talk about is the film's biggest plothole. And to do this, I need to talk a little bit about the film's plot. So, Jesse and his family have taken over the house that Nancy Thompson was staying sometime after the events of the first movie. And for some reason, Freddy chooses Jesse to essentially do his killing for him while still kinda being in his dream world. Believe me when I tell you guys that the story in this movie makes no sense at all. First of all, I need to address the title of this movie, specifically, the subtitle "Freddy's Revenge". What exactly is Freddy getting revenge for? Is it because of Nancy Thompson? Well, I would've believed that if not for the fact that she doesn't appear in this movie whatsoever, outside of being mentioned that she went crazy after what happened in the first movie. And also, this movie doesn't really explain anything else about what happened to Nancy beyond what I've already touched upon for you guys.

Now the second thing I need to ask is why does he need Jesse for him to do his killing? Is it because he needs a male host's body in order for him to pull it off? Well, by that logic, he could've done this with Jesse's Dad and it probably would've made very little difference. Or is it because he occupies Nancy's room and he just chose him out of sheer randomness? I don't know why exactly he needs Jesse, since it's never really explained why he needs him to do his dirty work. If the entire goal is to get people afraid of Freddy Krueger, then it's kind of a stupid plan since the only people who are aware of him are Jesse and Lisa. No one else seems to be aware of him, unless the story about Krueger is being intentionally covered up. Which wouldn't be out of the realm of possibility considering he did get acquitted and all by a technicality, which ultimately lead to his death.

But that aside, there is one other big problem with this story, which is if Freddy can do over half the shit he did in this movie, then why the hell didn't he do this kind of thing in the first movie? I mean, if he can possess someone's body like the way he did with Jesse, then why didn't he do any of this shit with any of the characters in the first movie when he had the chance? I can, maybe, forgive the possibility of them not using Nancy because, I guess, it would look awkward if he possessed a girl or some kind of shit like that. If he had picked Glen from the first movie, then he probably would've accomplished as much as he did in this film. At least, that's my thought process anyway. But at the same time, it would also undermine his character, like it was here, because the shit he pulls off, while interesting at times, it also comes off as rather goofy and stupid, too. Like the shit involving that bird that exploded earlier in the movie.

One other thing that bothered me about Freddy is, well, the lack of Freddy in this film. See, even though he is the star of this franchise, and also has his first name on the front cover of the movie, he's really not in this film all that long. And I know that was the case for the first movie, but it worked there because it brought some kind of mystique to the character that made you want to see more of him. In this movie, though, while while they're still trying to keep some of that mystique, it doesn't really work as well because they kind of hold off his appearance for a little too long. Now granted, when he *is* on screen, the movie starts to get interesting again, but on the long sequences when he's not there, it just kinda makes the movie a little dull to watch. Which I didn't think I would ever say about this film franchise, especially when we're only on the second movie, too.

Now I will say, despite everything involving Freddy and his stupid ass plan, the movie is still okay. I mean, sure, it's definitely a step down when it comes to the writing, but at least the film is still mildly entertaining. Our characters are, admittedly, nowhere near as interesting as the first movie was. Most of them are kinda stereotypical teenagers while Jesse is fighting the paranoia of losing his mind because Freddy is itching ever closer to taking over him completely. Which is honestly the only thing interesting about his character, really. But other than that, he's still pretty bland, overall. He's definitely not as interesting as Nancy was, at least in terms of being a main character, anyway. And Freddy himself, well, he's not as cool as he was in the previous movie. He still has his moments here, such as when he opened himself out of Jesse's body. But aside from that, some of the stuff he does in this film is not as interesting as it was in the first movie. But I'll get more into that when I go over special effects.

So, writing in this movie is definitely a step down from the first film. And the characters are mostly in the same boat, as well. Acting here is mostly pretty decent, though I gotta say that Lisa's actress in this movie is kinda terrible. I can see in some glimpses that she's trying, but the problem here is that she doesn't really try hard enough to emote. Which, if you compared it to Nancy's actress from the first movie, she definitely had more of a range in her voice because she had more to work with. Lisa's actress, while, again, she's trying desperately to make her dialogue work, it doesn't really work as much because her acting is just really kinda shit. Everyone else, though, I can say at least turns in a pretty good showing. And even though Robert Englund isn't in the movie all that much, he's still very good as Freddy Krueger and is able to do some fun shit whenever he's on screen. So yeah, for the most part, the acting here is pretty good, save for Lisa's actress.

Let's talk about special effects next. I'm gonna say that the special effects are still very top notch, even for a low budget of $3 million dollars. The makeup effects on Freddy Krueger are still amazing, and the blood effects are still really good, as well. However, this does present one slight problem here. The kills in this movie that Freddy does are incredibly weak. A lot of the creativity involving the kills seem a little watered down, when compared to the first movie. The most creative kill you get here is when Freddy kills Jesse's school coach, which really isn't saying much because it's still rather weak. Another kill I can recall happening is when Freddy chokes one of Jesse's friends to death, which, to be fair, is something a little similar to what he pulled off in the first movie. The only difference is that that he used a noose to choke somebody to death with. Which was definitely more interesting than what he pulled off here since he only used his free hand, and also stabbed him right towards the end, too. But yeah, the kills in this movie are also a huge step down from the first one, which is really disappointing to see.

Camerawork in this movie is really good. Lighting here is lit fine. The sound-mixing here is also good. The music here is also pretty good, too. So, on a technical standpoint, this movie is at least consistent with itself. At least so far anyway.

Ultimately, guys, when everything is said and done, am I able to recommend "A Nightmare on Elm Street 2: Freddy's Revenge"? Kind of, yes. As long as you're able to overlook how stupid Freddy's plan really is, then the movie is still pretty decent. It's certainly nowhere near as good as the first movie was, however, I also kinda figured it wouldn't be as good as the first film anyway, seeing as how that first movie set the bar really high on how great it was. That may also be the case for the other movies going forward, but I don't really know yet. I still have two more of these movies to go for now. But as for the case with Nightmare 2, I can still say it's worth a watch if you like seeing more of Freddy Krueger in action. Just don't expect a whole lot from him here, seeing as how he's not in the movie for all that long. Now, as for myself, I'm gonna go and watch something different. I think, maybe, I'll just go and watch something like, uh...you know what? Seeing as how I just got finished watching a kinda decent horror movie sequel, I'm gonna go and watch a better horror movie sequel. I think I'll go and watch something like "Wishmaster 2: Evil Never Dies". While it may not be as good as the first film was, I still really liked it. So I'm gonna go and do that next once I get done with this review.

Anyway, guys, with that, we come to the close of another Reaction & Review. Until next time, ladies and gentlemen, take care, and I will see you all later. Peace.

Reaction & Review | Underworld: Evolution

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to an all new Reaction & Review. Tonight, guys, I'm continuing the "Underworld" series by checking out it's 1st sequel, which came out in 2006. That movie is "Underworld: Evolution".

Now, for those of you who reading this for the first time, about a week ago, I reviewed the first "Underworld" movie. And the best way I can summarize my opinions about it is that I honestly thought it was just okay. It wasn't terrible, but it was heavily flawed with a story that really didn't make a whole lot of sense once you start to pick it apart, along with characters whose motives are ambiguous at best and confusing at worst. And I said that as long as you try not to think about it's flaws too much, then the movie is just fine as a mindless popcorn flick. Which is honestly the best way I was able to recommend that movie to you guys.

So now, that brings us to it's first sequel, "Underworld: Evolution". Now, I'd love to tell you guys everything I know about this movie, but aside from it being a sequel to "Underworld", I really don't know jack shit about it. Well correction, I do know that it stars Kate Beckinsale as Selene once again, along with the other guy, Scott Speedman, who played Michael Corvin from the first movie.

Beyond that, though, I don't know anything about the plot to this movie. The only thing I ask from it is to at least be, in someway, better than the first film. Because that first film's story just didn't really make a whole lot of sense. At least, to me, it didn't. Still though, I'm hoping that this movie will be able to fix some of the problems I had with the first film. I won't know for sure, though, unless I shut up and I push play, and I'm gonna do that right now. So, without further ado, it's time to kick back, relax, and check out "Underworld: Evolution".

16 minutes later

Well, guys, I do have some good news. Kraven from the previous movie is now dead thanks to Markus cutting his head off. I'm really thankful he's now dead because he was annoying as fuck in the first movie. So, less I have to deal with him the better.

15 minutes later

All right, guys, I think now is a good time to mention this as any. The blood effects in this movie are absolutely horrible. And I should stress that I'm mainly talking about digital blood. The practical blood here is fine, but every time that I'm seeing CG blood in this movie, it looks like complete shit. Just wanted to let you guys know.

4 minutes later

Well, what do you know? This movie actually answered a slight problem I had in the previous movie, which was whether or not daylight actually existed in this universe. Well, I can officially say that it totally does. I'm actually really surprised by that. I didn't think they would answer something so minuscule about the existence of daylight, but at least they answered that much. That's certainly cool, I guess.

12 minutes later

OK, well that was sorta brutal. Just Michael ripping off another lycan's lower jaw like that is definitely something that I wouldn't think he would be able to do, but at least it shows off Michael's strength as a lorcan himself pretty decently. So at least it's something.

20 minutes later

So...I guess Michael's dead now. And you know what? I don't care. I honestly didn't think he had much of a character to begin with in the first movie, and so to have him die here kinda leaves me empty about the whole thing. So...as much as this movie is trying to make me care about his death...I really can't find myself a reason to care about it.

18 minutes later

OK, well, I guess I was wrong into thinking that Michael was dead. I mean, with him being a half lorcan half vampire, him being killed off halfway into the film would've been really odd. But at least he still lives. It's just kind of a pity that I still don't really care for his character here. But at least he has a chance to make some sort of impact before the movie ends. At least, I hope so, anyway.

The Review

Well, guys, that was "Underworld: Evolution". Let me go ahead and shut the movie off here...OK. So, where to start here? I guess I should answer this much before I go any further into the review. Is this movie good, or at least better than the first movie? Kind of, yes, but that's not really saying very much. I know that may seem a little vague, but honestly, it's gonna be a little hard for me to talk about this one, simply because it's a little bit forgettable. Which sounds more bad than good, but I'm still gonna mention the positives this movie has when I get to it.

Right now, I'm just gonna dive right into this movie and see where I can start with. Why don't we cover the biggest problem I had with the first "Underworld" movie, which was it's writing. I touched upon it a little bit earlier but the writing in that film almost made no sense because of the ambiguous factions between the vampire and lorcans, and you don't know who you're suppose to root for. This movie, at the very least, has a bit more of a cohesive narrative, as the movie just picks up right where it left off from the end of the first movie with Selene and Michael on the run together. And on the flip side, we have Markus tracking down the pendant keys to unlock the door that holds his brother, William, who is also a lorcan, and has also lived for centuries, despite being imprisoned. Which is a little strange, but then again, this is a universe where vampires and werewolves still exist, so I suppose I can withhold my suspension of disbelief there.

So while the story here is more simplified, that actually leads into another big problem that I've noticed. You see, even though this movie is a sequel to the first "Underworld" movie, it really is just more of the same. There's not really much here, plot wise, that is going to catch your interest unless if you were a big fan of the first movie. And as I've already made clear, I thought the first film was just okay. I went into this one thinking that it was going to improve itself, as a sequel should do. And while it sorta does that, at the same time, however, I just don't feel as invested into it as I should be. Sure, stuff does happen here, but I honestly can't bring myself to remember a lot of the details that happened, outside of what I've already outlined for you guys. It really is just more of the same, and honestly feels the same, too, in some areas.

Speaking of, let's talk about the characters. And I'm just gonna come out and tell you guys that all of the characters in this movie are bland and one dimensional. Again, you have Markus, who is looking to free his brother and do...something or what. All I remember from what I heard from his Dad is that he's looking for total power, and when Selene told him that he could've killed Markus at anytime, he basically just uses the cliche saying of 'oh, well he's still my son' and all that crap. But I'm not gonna harp on that one too much. Michael still is pretty much the same character as he was in the first movie, though if I can give him any slight credit here, at least he's more willing to help out Selene whenever he gets a chance because, well, he and Selene are a pairing. Honestly, I never really bought that kind of thing in the first movie and, to me, it just feels a little bit manufactured here.

And as for Selene, well, you do learn a little bit more of her backstory and why exactly her family was targeted in the first place. Which is perfectly fine, however, in terms of her character, she really doesn't go through much change in her personality. Hell, by the end of the movie, it almost ends exactly as it did in the first film with Selene and Michael getting together and Selene monologuing to close it out. I'm not kidding, guys, this movie *really* is just more of the same. And I'm not saying that as a completely bad thing, however, I just wish this movie did more with itself other than just playing it safe. I know the third film is a prequel, so there is a chance we get to see this series do something different with itself. However, I'm gonna reserve judgement on that one until I eventually cover that movie.

But as for this film, well, like I said, the writing here is, well, more of the same of what you'd get from the first movie. And if you liked how the first movie was written, then hey, you're bound to get more of the same here with some minor changes. But as for it being more, well, there's not much else here for story because it's mostly just forgettable. Now as for the acting, well, the acting here is still top notch. I can't really say anything bad about that because just about everyone in this cast did really well with their performances. So on that end, I can at least say that the acting still is consistently good from the first movie to this one.

Special effects, however, are a different story. The blood effects in this movie are horrible. And, once again, I have to stress that this is mainly for anytime the movie uses digital blood, which there is quite a bit of digital blood here. And I'm gonna tell you guys, right now, that digital blood almost always looks like shit. The only exception I can think of is "Stitches" because that movie didn't really use it very much. That, and the digital blood actually felt, well, "real" in a matter of speaking. This movie, however, almost every time there's a blood splatter here, it's almost always digital blood and it looks awful. Now yes, there is some usage of practical blood here whenever it's covering an actor's face, however, that stuff is very few and far between because the usage of digital blood here almost overlaps all of the practical blood effects. Which is completely inexcusable. And mind you, this movie was operating on a budget of $45 million dollars! So there is no excuse for the blood effects in this movie to look so fucking bad.

Now, beyond the digital blood effects, the CG in this movie is fine for what it is. It's not amazing by any stretch, but at the very least, it's still passable. The lorcans look okay, although I do have to question why exactly William looks more like a wolf than an actual lorcan, though I'm just gonna take a wild guess and say that he's a "special" type of lorcan. Don't ask me what that entails, because I don't recall this movie ever mentioning something like that. But anyway, the special effects in this movie are decent best.

Camerawork here is pretty good. The lighting here is lit very well, as it mostly retains the look of how the first movie looked there, which is always a plus. Sound-mixing here is also good. The music is, well, completely unmemorable. Not horrible, mind you, just not really something you're gonna remember this movie by.

So anyway, when it comes down it, guys, can I recommend "Underworld: Evolution"? If you liked the first movie and you want to see more of the same of what was presented there, then you're most likely gonna have a blast with this movie. If you're expecting anything new or different, however, you're not really gonna find much of that here. While the story is more simple to follow, it's also very forgetful, as well. At least, to me, it is. If you really liked the story here, then more power to you. You found something in it that I didn't. Now let me just re-clarify for you guys that I don't hate this movie. I may not care for it, but I don't really hate it. It's just more of what you come to expect from the first movie and doesn't really change very much. And if that's what you liked, then great, you're gonna have a lot of fun with this movie. It's just, for me, I kinda expected more from it. Now whether the prequel film changes this or not, I can't say for sure yet. I'll find out for myself when I get to covering it. In the meantime, however, I'm gonna go and watch "Stitches" again, seeing as how I mentioned it earlier and, well, it's been a little while since I last saw it. So, I'm gonna go and do that right now as soon as I get this review uploaded.

Anyway, guys, with that, we come to the close of another Reaction & Review. Until next time, ladies and gentlemen, take care, and I will see you all later. Peace.

Reaction & Review | A Nightmare on Elm Street

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to an all new Reaction & Review. Tonight, guys, I'm gonna be covering a slasher movie from 1984. That movie is "A Nightmare on Elm Street".

Now this may come as a surprise to some people who are reading this for the first time, but I have never actually seen any of the "Nightmare on Elm Street" movies. I've sometimes referenced it in my past reviews, but never have I actually seen of any them. The closest that I've came to that was when I watched "Freddy vs. Jason". Which I really enjoyed, even though I'm aware some people weren't exactly fans of that movie. And just as an off note, I have seen several of the "Friday the 13th" movies, but those were in no particular order. The ones I remember seeing were the first, third, and a little bit of "Jason X". So while I may not be able to cover those particular movies from the beginning, the "Nightmare on Elm Street" movies are a different story. And, similar to what I'm doing with the "Underworld" franchise, I'm gonna be covering the first 4 movies in the "Nightmare on Elm Street" series thanks to a 4 movie combo pack that I picked up at my local mini mall sometime ago.

Now I'm gonna give you guys the basics of everything I know about the "Nightmare on Elm Street" movies. I know that they're slasher movies, I know they all star Robert Englund as Freddy Krueger, and I also know Mr. Krueger himself kills people inside their dreams while they're asleep. I also know, thanks to "Freddy vs. Jason", that he's something of a child killer. Though whether he was considered a pedophile or not is just implied since they don't really ever explore that area of his character. I don't know how much of that is gonna be shown in any of the first few movies, but I'll find out for myself once I start watching them.

But yeah, guys, I'm really looking forward to watching these movies. I've heard various things about the sequels after this one, but I do know most people say this movie is a classic. Though whether that holds up or not is something I'll find out for myself. And the only way I'm gonna know if this movie still holds up 42 years later is if I shut up and I push play, and I'm gonna do that right now. So, without further ado, it's time to kick back, relax, and check out "A Nightmare On Elm Street".

6 minutes later

You know, guys, when I saw Johnny Depp's name pop up in the opening credits, I thought I was just mistaken, but nope, that actually *is* Johnny Depp. A much younger Depp, obviously, but still, I honestly had no idea he was in this movie until I just saw him. That's actually really interesting.

1 minute later

OK, that's probably one of the more creative uses I have seen for a cassette radio. That is really cool, and funny as hell, too.

7 minutes later

OK, that was genuinely creepy as shit. The way that wall almost took shape in the form of Freddy looked really fucking creepy. But also, really cool, too.

17 minutes later

You know, guys, I was just thinking about something. So, from what I remember about my multiple watchthroughs of "Freddy vs. Jason", Freddy talked about how he can't come back if he's forgotten. So that means that someone had to originally think of him at some point in order for Freddy to begin his killings, right? And if that's the case, then I have to wonder who originally thought of him to begin with? I know it probably sounds like I'm digging a little too deep here, but it's just something that I wanted to share with you guys. It's sorta bugging me slightly.

9 minutes later

All right, that was certainly gross there. Never imagined a centipede crawling out of a girl's mouth like that. Granted, she is technically dead, but still, it was pretty fucking gross.

11 minutes later

So Nancy, somehow, grabbed Freddy's hat out of her dream while she was sleeping in the hospital. And I say "somehow" because we never saw her dream. So how exactly she was able to get it off him is anyone's guess, really. At the very least, this proves that she's not crazy. So, at least that's progress.

8 minutes later

OK, hold up a minute here. So, Nancy's mother is showing her the claws that Freddy-oh, my bad "Fred", had down in her basement. Even though a just moment ago, she told Nancy the story about what he did when he was alive and how the parents went and killed him by burning him and the boiler room down that he stayed in. So how is it then that Nancy has his claws if they burned the place where he stayed at? I'm really curious here, unless Nancy's mother retrieved it after Fred was killed. Which would be the only explanation I can think of, but still, it raises a bunch of other questions, such as why she even kept those claws to begin with? I'm really sorta curious here.

10 minutes later

Guys, out of all things I do remember about the "Nightmare on Elm Street" movies, it's this kill. And seeing it now, in full context, it still looks awesome. I love it.

The Review

Well, guys, that was "A Nightmare on Elm Street". Let me go ahead and shut the movie off here...OK. Wow, um...where to start here? Well, I guess I should go ahead and say right off the bat that, yeah, this movie is great. It probably shouldn't be shocking, but as I said earlier, I had never seen any of the "Nightmare on Elm Street" movies before, so I kinda went into this with a little bit of caution on the off chance that I didn't like it. Well, thankfully, I can let my caution down here because I really enjoyed the hell out of this movie.

Why don't we start off with what I usually start with these reviews, which would be it's writing. Writing in this movie great. And it's really interesting to see this for the first time, because, while I did know about Freddy Krueger for a long time, I never got a chance to see any of the movies that he starred in. And watching this movie, I noticed something, which is gonna be a minor nothing, but I still want to make mention of it. You see, even though he is the main attraction of this movie, you don't really see very much of him. You see him in pieces, especially when he's about to make his move on his next victim. And normally, I would complain about the lack of presence involving an important character for your flagship movie. But in this case, it actually works because it builds up something of a mystique to the character that makes you interested in him. And while you may not see much of him, he definitely leaves an impact, both on the viewer, and on his victims. The kills, I should mention, are great here. However, I'll touch more upon that when I cover special effects.

Anyway, as for the story, well, I did bring up earlier about when I was watching "Freddy vs. Jason" that Freddy was a child killer. And they do bring that up during the last third of the movie as Nancy's mother talks to her in private about his origin. That being said, there is one or two things that sorta nag at me a bit. The one big one, for me, is how exactly Freddy got his start after he was killed. Because, again, Freddy only appears when someone starts to think about him, which is where he supposedly gains his powers. And when people start to forget about him or don't actually fear him, he loses his powers, in a way, and he can't come back. Again, I'm basing this off what I viewed from "Freddy vs. Jason", because that's where most of my knowledge about the character comes from. So when it comes to this movie, someone must've remembered him at some point, which would naturally mean that his presence would become more well known in the public. Or at least within certain people's minds. Glen, I think, was the only one who never thought about him because he never had any nightmares involving Krueger until his death. I'm guessing Tina, the first victim of Krueger, must've discovered something about him first at some point, which is how we see her in his dream world at the start of the film.

But that really is just me trying to stretch a nitpick that if you think about it too much, then it might nag at you for the entirety of the film. Which it really shouldn't because it's ultimately trivial in the end. And being that this is the first movie of this franchise, I can let any minor nitpicks I have with writing go to the wayside because it's very well possible that this could've been a standalone movie, had it flopped or Wes Craven, the writer and director of the movie, didn't have any interest in making a sequel. The only reason why I wanted to talk about it in depth is because, well, again, my knowledge about Krueger came from "Freddy vs. Jason", and seeing as how I've seen that film multiple times, it's just something that I wanted to make mention of is all. And believe me when I say that, even if you have never seen "A Nightmare on Elm Street" before, or even saw "Freddy vs. Jason" first like I did, it's not really gonna affect your enjoyment of this movie because it's a really solid film in it's own right, and is able to stand on it's own two feet with little to no problems at all.

And as for our characters, well, barring Fred Krueger for a moment, the only one who has any sort of depth here is Nancy, because she's the one who gets the most development out of our main protagonists. Everyone else is just sorta there, really. They're not horribly developed or anything, it's just that you're not really going to care about them as much because they'll most likely be victims of Fred Krueger. And speaking of which, Krueger in this movie is phenomenal. Again, you don't really see him very much on screen, but when he *does* appear, it is nothing short of amazing. He is rather charismatic, even if it is a little downplayed when compared to his appearance in "Freddy vs. Jason". But that's just a minor thing, really. And a lot of his greatness here comes from the fact that he's played by the ever talented Robert Englund. However, I'll touch upon him when I cover acting in just a second here. But yeah, in terms of characters, the only two who have any sort of depth and personality is Freddy Krueger and Nancy. And just as another minor thing, I really don't like how his first named is shortened. I don't know if that was meant to be intentional, or, if later down the line, they realized that adding the extra letters in his name would make him more marketable. If it's the latter, then I'm glad they went with that option because I'm kinda getting tired of just calling him "Fred" instead of "Freddy". But that's just me, personally.

Aside from all that, guys, the writing here is very solid. Any nitpicks that I could pick apart from here are all trivial in the long run because the movie is very sharp in it's writing, and can stand on it's own without it being weighed by it's nitpicks. And it's also very entertaining, too, which is a definite plus for me. Now as for the acting, well, as I mentioned a moment ago, Robert Englund as Freddy Krueger is fantastic here. Admittedly though, I'm kinda more used to the deeper voice he usually gives out when he's hamming it up. But here, it's more so downplayed, yet is still able to be charismatic at the same time without losing any of his charm. Which is what I believe makes his performance stand out so much. But then again, he is the main reason why you should see this movie. If he wasn't, well, then this franchise would've been dead before it got started. But anyway, our other cast members do a fantastic job, too. The one who surprises me the most is Johnny Depp because, as I mentioned before, I had no idea he was even in this movie until I started watching it. And when you see him in this movie, he's very unrecognizable because he's usually associated in a lot of Burton's movies, in which he plays weirder characters. Here though, he's just playing a regular dude who's also Nancy's boyfriend. So, it may take some time for any fans of Johnny Depp, who have not seen any earlier films that he was in, to get use to how he looks here. Still though, his acting here is really solid, as is the entire supporting cast.

Special effects in this movie are absolutely phenomenal. In terms of practical effects used in horror movies, this may be one of the higher echelons of how amazing the special effects are. The blood effects are tremendous, especially that one scene that, if you've seen this movie, you'll know which one I'm referring to because that kill was amazing. The makeup effects on Krueger's face are also amazing, as is his iconic costume as well. I know, to some people, that a red and green sweater and a hat may not seem like much for a horror character, but when you compare it other slasher killers like Jason Voorhees and Michael Myers, who's main attraction for their costumes is mainly their masks, Freddy's stand out much more since he's not hiding behind a mask. Not that I'm saying that the masks aren't terrible or anything, far from it, it's just when it comes to the rest of their costumes, they pale in comparison to Freddy Krueger's. Although that's mainly just a personal preference for me. But anyway, the point is the costume, makeup effects, and practical effects involving blood are absolutely fantastic.

Camerawork here is really good. Lighting is lit very well, even in the darker lit scenes. The sound-mixing here is almost great, aside from the beginning, when Tina wakes up from her dream and the audio takes a bit of a dip when her mother comes to check up on her when she begins talking. I don't know if that was an issue on the VHS version, or if it was a technical hiccup when putting the movie on DVD, but regardless, it is the only one issue I had with the sound-mix. Apart from that, however, the sound-mixing here is still great. And the music is also really good, too, as you get to hear Freddy's theme quite a bit in this movie and it's nothing short of amazing, no matter how many times you hear it, because it never gets old. At least, to me, it doesn't.

So when all is said and done, guys, am I to recommend "A Nightmare on Elm Street"? Of course I'm totally gonna recommend it. It's a great fucking movie! And if you're a horror movie fan and you still haven't seen this film yet, then why the fuck are you still reading this review? Go and watch it already! Granted, the review's almost over, and if you stuck around for this long, then thank you, but still, any horror movie fanatic should at least see this movie once. Granted, I'm gonna be watching it multiple times over because it's that fucking good, but still, I enjoyed this film greatly and I'm certainly looking forward to watching the next 3 movies this month. Again, I've heard various things about the sequels, both good and bad, but I'll find out for myself how good or bad those movies are until I start watching them. But until then, I'm gonna go and "Freddy vs. Jason" again, seeing as how I've mentioned that film many times in this review already and I'm kinda in the mood to see more Freddy Krueger already, so I'm gonna go do that next shortly after I get this review uploaded already.

Anyway, guys, with that, we come to the close of another Reaction & Review. Until next time, ladies and gentlemen, take care, and I will see you all later. Peace.