Tremors 5 Trailer Surfaces - Spoilers Level: Medium

A trailer has emerged for "Tremors 5: Bloodlines". With a little over two months left till the home release we finally get a closer look at what to expect. Is it good? Be warned that the rest of this post will look into the trailer, and may therefore contain spoilers for the film itself.

The All-New Movie Tremors 5: Bloodlines available October 6th on Blu-ray, DVD and Digital HD.Jamie Kennedy joins Michael Gross in this cult classic franchise > http://uni.pictures/Tremors5Portal#TremorsMovie

Posted by Tremors on 27. juli 2015

So what do we think? Is this something we're excited about? Is this what we have been waiting on for over a decade? Personally, I am really disappointed at what we get here. It doesn't seem to really match any of the previous Tremors film on any level. Be it the visuals, the audio, the acting, or the thematics. Not even Michael Gross seem to quite remember how to pull off a decent Burt Gummer.

We'll start right off with the biggest reveal and "spoiler" of the trailer, the new monster. There's a new monster that looks like a mix between a shrieker, graboid, and those things from "Tremors" homage "Grabbers". Its introductory scene is in a kitchen and is a clear reference to the kitchen scene in "Jurassic Park". But we don't get to see it "properly" until later in the trailer when Jamie Kennedy's character is faced off with the creature in what I'd think is a dark cave.

We can argue day and night until the release over where this fits into the evolutionary chain of the graboid, but it could easily be something different all together. We already know that assblasters lay the graboid eggs, and that "Tremors 5" was originally going to go into detail on the egglaying process, but the creature pictured above does not seem to have morphed from any of the creatures already known. My biggest hope is that this is a further development of the mixmaster formula explored in the Tremors TV series. Perhaps it has mixed a graboid, a shrieker, and an assblaster all together to form one übermonster. If that's the case I'm all for it. But I seriously doubt they'd pull in something only the fans would know of for a soft reboot like this.

Burt Gummer is another disappointment from the trailer. He just doesn't feel like he's Burt Gummer. Sure, it's been a while since we last saw him, and he's probably been through a lot of shit, but the main draw of this film was seeing Burt Gummer battle graboids once again. What we get seem to instead be a stylised version of the kind of character Burt Gummer was a spoof of. All in an effort to fit into what seems to be a highly more polished and referential film than the rest of the series.

I'm hoping that all of my concerns are just the result of the trailer editing. That they're trying to pander to an audience that isn't actually going to like this film. It seems like a stupid move, but is not unheard of with films like this. I guess we'll just have to wait and see when "Tremors 5: Bloodlines" drops October 6th.

Sniper: Legacy - Not Bad

Don Michael Paul, director of the upcoming fifth Tremors film, had "Jarhead 2: Field of Fire" released not even two months ago and he's already ready with another film. This too is a DTV (Direct to Video) sequel to a theatrical film, though this one has already two other sequels ahead of it, making "Sniper: Legacy" the fourth in the series. For "Jarhead 2: Field of Fire" I saw it fit to watch the first film first, to see how they compared, this time I've decided to go in blank, hoping to see if "Sniper: Legacy" holds up on its own.

"Sniper: Legacy" follows sniper Brandon Beckett on a rouge mission to find the killer of his father, Thomas Beckett. A renegade sniper is killing everyone who was a part of an old mission, and it's up to a team of snipers, shadowed by Brandon Beckett, to find and kill whoever it is before the last person on the list is crossed off.

This is a perfectly decent film, especially considering it's a DTV release and the fourth in its series. It doesn't feel old and outplayed, though the concept doesn't reek of originality either, and it fits well into both current affairs and long-term ones. If someone showed me this without any knowledge of it beforehand, I'd walk away completely entertained. It's exciting, it's intriguing, and it doesn't suffer from any major flaws. There's nothing that strikes out as something I'd want to change or see play out differently. It's an all around fun film.

What's perhaps the most impressive is how cinematic it looks. I'm not sure if this is due to the director or his, or the studios', fine choice in cinematographers, but both "Sniper: Legacy" and "Jarhead 2" look like films that could be shown at a cinema. The only real difference that would make them stand out is the colour grading. They don't look like they've been fitted to play in a darkened theatre, and the cameras are more recognisable as something you'd see on a television series than a film, but the framing and editing makes it mostly appear to be of a much higher standard.

Overall this is a nice film to watch on a weekend night, but nothing that should be high on a priority list unless you happen to be into military themed films, and even then there's probably plenty of other films you could or should watch instead. But as someone who watches a lot of films and is constantly on the look-out for something more to watch than the big blockbusters, this is a good choice. It's better than a good portion of the films I've watched so far this year, and it definitely made me interested in checking out the previous installments of the series.

Angry Video Game Nerd: The Movie - It's Okay I Guess [Spoiler Levels: Moderate]

Angry Video Game Nerd was one of the first webseries I ever watched regularly. It's been around since before YouTube, having the first two episodes be produced in 2004, but it wasn't until YouTube came around that it really hit it big. It's been the go-to series for fictionalised game reviewers to take inspiration from, and it's not all that certain that shows devoted to retro games would be as prevalent today had it not been for James Rolfe. And now, finally, he's gotten to make it into a feature length film. It was released on VimeoOnDemand earlier today after a short tour of the US at small theatres, and I like many others quickly paid up and sat down. Sadly, I was left disappointed.

I don't know exactly what I expected from this film. The concept of an angry man playing video games while talking to a camera isn't the most adaptable concept in the world. James Rolfe early said that it wouldn't be anything like the show, rather it would be about the Nerd himself on a quest to find a video game to review, and that is exactly what it is about in the end.

For anyone who has followed James Rolfe, the creator of AVGN, as much as the AVGN series itself knows that he's long been interested in films. His website, Cinemassacre.com, is filled with films and webseries. Even going as far as making a film called "Cinemassacre 200" all about the 200 short films he's made over the years. Taking this into account, I was quite excited about the prospect of an AVGN film. Not only was the beloved Nerd getting a feature length story to develop himself, but it was going to let James Rolfe make a larger budget feature film, something that was interesting just in itself. World quickly spread that he had worked on a script for a film for a few years, trying to make it as good as possible. Fine tuning it and bringing on others to help him finding out what it should be. It all sounded good at the time, but it just lead to the film being more disappointing than it had to be.

First things first, James Rolfe has stated several times that he enjoys films that are so bad that they are good, he's also a big fan of mid-20th century monster films. Several aspects from these loves has appeared in the Angry Video Game Nerd series before, so it wasn't entirely out of the question that they would again for the film. I just wish they had been executed better. One of the biggest problems the film has is the inconsistency in its special and visual effects. It doesn't just stay to one kind of visual style, instead there are some sequences that are entirely made out of miniature models, and some that are just actors on poorly keyed green screens. I can appreciate the miniature models. They're charming, they're old-school, and they get the point across that you don't necessarily have budget for big visual effects. But bad green screens says just one thing, you didn't have good enough equipment. There's no real charm in seeing slight bleed on a green screen shot. There's nothing old-school about noticing the differences in lighting between the actors and the backdrop. It just takes you out of the experience, making you lose your place until it happens again. You especially notice it in some parts when there's green screen shots for locations they'd previously actually shot at. They needed pick-up shots but hadn't the money to travel back, so they just shot them in a studio. It doesn't look too good.

More importantly, though, is the narrative. I get why Rolfe did a lot of the things he did, but I wish he'd done it better. For starters, there's two new "main" (ish) characters in this film. Cooper and Mandi. A film with just a lonely video game nerd can become boring, difficult, or uninteresting, so I understand the need to add more elements. But it should have been more thought through. Cooper was fine enough for what he was, comic relief, a sidekick. He got some laughs when he needed to, and he helped push the Nerd to do what he needed to throughout the picture. But Mandi didn't really do anything. The only thing she was responsible was an opportunity that lead to the Nerd going on his quest. An opportunity that could've been easily replaced with something else, or they could've just limited her character to exactly that, but instead they made her a bigger part of the film. She ends up having so little to do, that a few ways through the film they literally just get rid of her. They let the bad guys take her, and the Nerd and Cooper don't even try to get her back. Mandi contributed nothing to the film, and it's a shame since she's one of few female parts in a male dominated film. The other big female part, Sergeant McButter, was a tad better. She was funny when needed to, and she stayed out of the way enough for her not to feel forced. Sure, it would've been nice to see her in a bigger part, but at least she didn't drag the film down by being out of place.

They managed to get the feeling more right for the ending segments, however. I won't talk too much about them, but they really got to grips with the balance between special and visual effects, and the balance between seriousness and absurdity in the story. If the entire film had had the same type of feeling and theme as the last half hour or so it would've been a much better film. One that I would watch over and over again. If only to re-experience how crazy it was.

Overall the film was completely okay, as someone who enjoys the webseries. If you haven't watched the webseries I highly doubt you'll find anything of any real entertainment from the film, other than the borderline campfactor. It's not quite bad-good enough to warrant a watch solely for that, and it's not quite good-good enough to warrant a watch based on that. The only thing of real entertainment was the cameos from other online reviewers, and the ending segments. Nothing more. If you really want to watch a feature length film based on an online show revolving around reviewing old junk you're better of watching "Ashens and the Quest for the GameChild" from 2013. Manages the balance a lot better.

Jarhead 2: Field of Fire (Unrated) - Tremors 5 Director's Latest Is Not Bad

The only reason I decided to watch Jarhead 2: Field of Fire was because its director, Don Michael Paul, is going to direct the fifth film of the Tremors franchise. I made sure to watch the first film first, but I have to say, its sequel is not half as bad as I expected.

Going through Don Michael Paul's IMDb credits for directing is a sobering experience for a Tremors fan. Sure, all the Tremors sequels were directed by people who hadn't directed anything at that point either (the writers S.S. Wilson and Brent Maddock directed 2 and 4, and 3 respectively), but they were involved with the characters already. They knew very well the universe they were setting up as they had written all of it. Don Michael Paul is more of a wild card. Universal wants to see if they can get any life back into the franchise, so they got a director well-versed in straight-to-home release films, and he even has a monster film under his belt (Lake Placid: The Final Chapter). Jarhead 2: Field of Fire convinced me he might direct a decent Tremors 5.

Let's get one thing straight first, although this shares a franchise with the 2005 Sam Mendes film, they have little to nothing in common. They might have just called it Field of Fire and just gotten a few remarks on how it was ripping off Jarhead, but they elected not to. The film does look like it's set in the same universe, however. It is filmed similarly, it uses some of the same tropes as the first film, and the central theme is shared. But beyond that they're two different films about two different sets of people.

The visuals were easily the best part of the film. I'm not certain how big of a budget this production had, but I doubt very much it came even close to the first film's 72 million dollars. Considering what they had, they managed to make a film that looked, most of the time, just as good as the first one. The only major differences were in the equipment, if I had to take a guess, the picture wasn't always as striking and interesting as in the first film. But they made up for it with its cinematography and costume designs. Sure, the costume designs are pretty standard, and military films aren't exactly uncommon, but it worked.

The worst part of the film is divided between the writing and the acting. I can't quite decide which is to blame the most for some of the lines that are sprinkled throughout the film. Lines that just feel out of place, and spoken oddly and completely out of character. At some points they even throw in "random" exposition segments which feels like they didn't even try to make it more organic and natural. They just threw the exposition into the film, and hoped it would stick. Because of some of these the film just feels longer than it should. 103 minutes isn't that long for a film these days, but when I got to the 90-minute mark I had already checked the remaining time twice. I just lost interest in it. The characters didn't hold up for the duration of the film, and I started wishing they would just get to the end. Not a good sign.

Overall the film is just above "okay". I don't know if I would say it is a good film, but it certainly isn't a bad one. There are times in there when I felt like I was watching a genuine big-budget Hollywood film, in a good way, but there are also times that makes me feel like I'm watching a high school play. I wouldn't recommend this film to anyone asking for something to watch, but I would neither recommend against watching it. If you're the type of person who don't need every film to be amazing, you'll probably enjoy this one. It's fun, it's interesting, and it's visually pleasing. All in all an alright ride.







Epilogue:
This film made me think Don Michael Paul might not be so bad at Tremors 5. He's not going to have anything to do with the script, that I've heard of at least, and I would call Jarhead 2 badly written before I called it badly directed. Of course this is a very small sample size to make any educated guesses, but considering this is one of the last of his films that's going to be released before Tremors 5, it's promising.