NoWo's Reviews
and roll a natural 1
Well, not really, the movie isn't that bad. But it's definitely a miss.
On the plus side, it's a pure, genre-mashing product of the early 90s. Same vein as Shadowrun, Torg, or even Roger Rabbit.
It shows no qualms in savagely mixing two sets of conventions, here noir and 'magic' (I'll get to that later).
Always a pleasure to see Ward, because Remo Williams and Tremors. Not the best of actors, but he really comes off as a genial chap.
I've always held Brown as hugely under-used, and he definitely is here. I understand he's a big voice actor, but the Kurgan should not have been the high point of his in-person career. Oh, well.
In my opinion, Moore made a living of coasting by on her physique; same as her Temu knock-off, Chastain. They just don't do it for me. Jessica Rabbit was far better.
The rest of the cast are C-listers, some better than others, Walker and O'Connor being surprise stand-outs.
Now for issues.
First, the movie can't decide on a tone. The light-hearted noir is down pat, no argument.
But the magic part can't quite decide between Xanth-like played-for-fun magic, and eldritch horror (_many_ Lovecraft references, beginning with the protagonist).
Both can be mixed (Ghostbusters!), but it does require a deft touch, which is sorely lacking here.
Then comes the money. And no lack thereof. This was shot for TV, and for (apparently) 6 millions in 1990. That's movie money. Not big movie, but still.
Campbell's direction is adequate (he's done better since), but can't hide the cheap.
The photography is hideously flat, the colour palettes are not noir, they're just drab, and the costumes!
People and cars are all swell, but the various monsters, spells and creatures are barely on the level of dirt-cheap, product-placing Japanese sentai shows. Go go rubber Ranger. Although _that_ would make for a funny commercial.
Frankly, it's so bad it's distracting. The gargoyle is just plain sabotage. The mythos elders from beyond the stars are truly indescribable, though. I simply cannot describe the horror.
The script is very average, but it's mostly a vehicle for world-building, or more precisely showing off the quirks of the movie's world, so, OK.
All in all, I'm torn between a 60 and a 40% mark.
I'll go with 60% because I like the high concept, and some of the actors.
If you don't share my tastes, make it 40%, call it a miss and watch something else. It's just not good enough.
Created: 01-02-2026
Un-original, even in its wokeness.
Admitedly, I haven't set foot in Norway in a long while. But I don't remember it as being quite that diverse. The crowds, not the characters with lines. But women everywhere in public office, that part is accurate.
The rest (white men) are retarded.
Main character is a nordic, loud-mouthed boss bitch with a colossal sense of her own importance.
The only one in the room who can recognize footprints.
By the way, the prints, close up, are fairly small compared to the beast's size. 150 feet, and the character does say 50 meters. Big ambitions, tiny bugdet, I guess. Creature's nowhere that tall.
Nature shots are gorgeous. That's free. But well shot.
Comamndo guy looks gay, Dad's a loony, G-man looks oddly Indian. The father-daughter chemistry feels off to me (or maybe I'm lucky with me wee lass). The only (short) scene that did not feel contrived was the guys bonding over Call of Duty.
Script is Jurassic-zilla with a Scandinavian skin.
How does one apply fire to offset regeneration if their skin is stone? Why are their tongues organic? Why do they have tails? Wait, that one is normal.
Whatever, I just want my XP.
Same level of stupidity too: no real-life military would deploy infantry against anything that big. And possibly not organic. Big boy, big toy. Bunker buster, baby, cause there's no kill like overkill.
So yeah, _that_ kind of movie. Commando guy whips out his 416 after seeing the troll tank an artillery volley unscathed.
Godzilla or Cloverfield did it better, with a creature so vast that it defied modern weaponry. Then again, budget.
As for anti-Christianity: it's a staple of Nordic mythos that the pre-Christian creatures are not compatible with the new religion. Same as the Fay of Brittany. But trolls that can "smell the blood of a Christian man" go pretty far back in the folk tales, and are not a modern attack on Christians.
There's a definite 'eco' undertone, though, despite a jab at 'Greta'.
All in all, I don't think this movie is actively woke. It's passively woke, basically what 'acceptable' culture is to 'normal' people over there. Maybe even what the director / producers _think_ people want.
Yeah. That far gone.
Then again, it's from the guy who gifted us A-cup Tomb Raider (which I haven't seen), so maybe I'm wrong, and it's his attempt to placate normal people.
Also, it is rather mediocre.
Won't watch the sequel.
Created: 12-30-2025
What did you expect?
From the get-go, Anderson let's it all hang out. And late 20s Anderson is sexy as sin.
Also, Word Up. The Gun cover, but it's still good. The music's the best part of the movie. Except the porno-sax parts.
The movie is basically Mad Maxablanca with boobs. Boobs on Boggie. Disturbing. Not sure it's comics-accurate, but who's read this?
Funny thing, America is ravaged by (un)civil strife in ... 2017.
Reality was less fun.
Then again, the 'safe' dollar is Canadian, so, sci-fi.
Also, Casablanca made sense to escape from Europe at the time. But trying to sneak into Canada? Isn't the border on the huge side?
Anderson is hardly inside her costumes. Not a thespian by any means, but she fits the role. She goes through the action parts a lot better than expected.
Morrison is just out of Once Were Warriors, but hey, bills are bills.
Rowell is (not) out of The Young & The Restless. Over 800 episodes. Impressive until one learns there are over 13k episodes. Anyway, not quite talented, but gorgeous.
Berkeley is a solid actor, doing a solid job.
Kier is, well, Kier. Has been all his life, so he's good at it.
The photography is surprisingly acceptable, albeit on the darker side, and the whole thing is rather well paced. Hogan does have a gazillion music videos to his name, so there's that.
No agenda that I could see. For those screaming Nazi imagery! Well, Casablanca rip-off, so Nazi rip-off.
Common sense rip-off.
It has some fun lines ("Pleasure doing business with you" "If it was pleasure, I'd charge more."), charismatic actors, a decent script, good music, good photo.
I rate it a solid 60% as a second-screener (technically third screen, but let us not nitpick).
As a main watch? It's a safe (but not for work) double-bill with Street Fighter, I guess.
Created: 12-30-2025
Let's not compare, because it doesn't
I would have rated this lower, but there has been so few comedies of late. And movies without an agenda. And it has Weird Al.
Neeson somehow stopped aging at 50 - he's still doing action flicks - but he's in the low seventies I think; same as Nielsen during his tenure.
He does his best, but lacks Nielsen's natural, goofy, self-aware comedic charm.
Anderson, well, looks Neeson's age, and never was much of an actress to begin with. Except maybe Barb Wire. Ah, time goes by.
The whole movie feels more like a 90s uninspired spoof movie (Kingsman in this case), with the only tangible link to Police Squad and The Naked Gun being the end credits.
Don't miss the end credits.
And go watch the originals. Which probably means go to your living room, but you get the point. And old ZAZ stuff.
Created: 12-30-2025
So you're like a -- we don't speak of it
SPOILERS -- SPOILERS -- SPOILERS
Well, not really. Jack is shown with pigeon wings on the jacket, and the scars show up in the first scene.
The script plays fast and loose with the cainite origin of -- we don't speak of it.
Rollins is somewhat convincing as Jack; the rest of the cast is on par.
The movie suffers from a slow start, where it does a lukewarm job of building up its main character.
It then devolves into a lazy and slow-paced Terminator-like action ending.
Its cardinal sin, in my eye, is the lack of lore-building. It awkwardly hints, sometimes, but never really sparks interest.
It stretches the 15-lines background of a game character into a 90 minutes movie. Just not enough butter for that much bread.
Well, Krawczyk (writer and director) apparently wrote a sequel with even less substance (She Never Died, I guess they'll need a dog to round up the trilogy).
So, as good as he gets.
Created: 12-27-2025
All out of gum
Much as I am tempted, I can't bring myself to rate this one a 5.
Carpenter is the king of 80s B-movies (except maybe for Buckaroo Banzai), They Live is a cult classic, but it definitely suffers from pacing issues. Although they are idiosyncratic to the 80s. As is utter disregard for trigger discipline. And for reloading.
Rowdy Roddy Piper is the original wrestler-turned-actor (Hogan and Andre never turned), and does a decent job delivering the lines. So does David.
The movie itself is a weird mix of action, sci-fi, thriller (so, usual Carpenter fare) and social commentary. Speaking of, the anti-consumerism message is still very much valid, and does not come across as woke to me. I mean, corpocracy is as far from free market as can be; it's basically Mussolini's modern fascism barely rebranded.
The script does take a jab at 'free enterprise', though.
Quite possibly a must-see for those who haven't, but it mostly made me want to rewatch Escape From NY (soon to be a documentary). And The Thing. Russell is simply better than Piper.
Created: 11-21-2025
Bollywood X-Men!
about as good as a Corman movie, but with more singing and dancing.
The script is drunken copy and paste, special effects are Tsui Hark, Chinese Ghost Story level but without the charm, and the acting without nuance.
Chopra is extremely attractive, Roshan is India's hunk (could easily pass off as Italian or Spanish, though), they both can dance, but it does not make a movie.
Made a killing at the domestic box office, though.
1 woke point 'cause the morality expressed in here doesn't sit well with me. Might be a culture thing. Well, morality _is_ cultural. Arguably.
Created: 11-06-2025
Not any better
This one was sold to me with "Aamir Khan is the Indian John Malkovich" and "You need to see the full trilogy to really appreciate it".
Well, not convinced. Although this movie is among the highest grossing ever. Indian domestic.
Kahn and filming on location in northern America must have ballooned the budget, though.
The script is heavy handed, but yeah, I'll probably, at some point, take some time to try Khan more serious movies.
The cinematography is surprisingly decent, actually; the director got better with practice.
The discount Moore's era Bond special effects and vehicles are, well, Moore had the charm to sell them. It's a rare gift. The twin (practical) effects are not too bad.
Oh, it's almost 3 hours. It feels slow and repetitive too. A 2-hour cut would have earned an extra point.
Created: 11-06-2025
More of the same
First opus made heaps of money, so a sequel was inevitable.
Cookie-cutter script, one dimensional characters.
The two leads have a WTF attitude that make their characters funnier, at least.
Rai is ludicrously gorgeous, and Roshan is stupidly handsome. They both can dance. But they sure can't play ball.
It's a long movie. Not only the runtime. Acceptable when second screening, but would not recommend.
Created: 11-06-2025
Rapidly paced and mildly angered
Watched this on the (repeated) recommendations of a friend; predictably, half Indian himself.
I would say Temu Fast & Furious knock-off, but I haven't seen any F&F movie, and it's more of an odd couple buddy movie I guess.
As with many of my forays into Indian movies, it's mostly average form and little substance.
The people in there are better dancers than actors. The 2+ hours runtime includes probably half an hour's worth of dancing and singing. They're all quite fetching too, as expected from Indian movies.
The cinematography is comparable to late 90s direct-to-DVD. Better than 80s direct-to-VHS, I guess. Except for the musical pieces. They're much better quality than the rest of the movie.
The plot is very forgettable (I already have), standard fare. Not to put a too fine point on it, but I second-screened this (all three, really, I'm a masochist) while doing repetitive, non-demanding work, and I don't think I missed any twist.
I don't even speak the language this was shot in ...
This being Bollywood, no explicit violence or nudity while coming as close as censorship will allow, but also a strangely lenient moral relativism despite being ostentatiously manichaean in its presentation.
As for representation, this movie is full of Indians. Joke aside, every character is very light-skinned, so, yeah, colourism is still going strong over there. Well, was, 20 years ago.
Created: 11-06-2025
