Q: What's an example of a movie review?
An example of a movie review is here: ****SPOILER ALERT**** All throughout Australia the summer turned into a deluge of rain and hail stones the size of baseballs that was causing havoc in coastal cities like Sydney. It's under these hectic conditions that tax lawyer David Burton, Richard Chamberlain,got involved in a case, as a defense attorney, involving the death of a local aborigine who was found dead outside a Sydney bar.

Having five fellow aborigines arrested for Billy Cormans,Athol Compton, death it's determined by the police coroner that Billy died of drowning not by violence even though he had bruises on his neck and shoulders. Yet the court decided to prosecute the five for his death charging them with manslaughter instead of murder.

David defending the five gets no help from them in their defense with the accused assailants opting to remain quite and keep what happened to Billy to themselves and take what's coming to them from the court. One of the defendants Chris, David Gulpili, begin to somehow invades David's dreams as if he want's to tell him what was really behind Billy's death.

David at first not taking his dreams of Chris seriously begins to sense that their real when he meet him at the courthouse. Chris confirms David's dreams by showing him a strange looking black rock that David saw Chris have in his dreams. Later meeting Chris and, what turns out to be an aborigine shaman, Charlie (Nandjiwarna Amagula) who came to his house that evening David is told that he, like Charlie, has spiritual powers that he inherited from his mother's grandfather. Those powers will reveal to him the future that has to do with the strange weather conditions that are flooding the Australian continent. The earth,Chris tells David, is going through a gigantic cleansing cycle with the old world about to be washed away and the new world ready to take it's place.

David is confused about what both Chris and Charlie are telling him but as the rains continue to increase and the ocean waves start to rise he feels that something terrible is going to happen. David want's to know if it's all aborigine folklore or there's some scientific facts, or logic, behind their end of world-like revelations.

By now it's obvious that both Chris and Charlie are members of an aborigine tribe right in the heart of modern Sydney. That alone can get Chris off, as well as his four friends, for the murder of Billy. Since the Australian government will not prosecute tribal aborigines, leaving any justice to be done by the tribes themselves. Still Chris refuses to admit he's a member of a native tribe and he and his four friends are convicted of manslaughter in Billy's death with the sentences to be handed down by the judge within days.

David now determined to find out what was the reason for Chris' silence, and why Billy had to die, is taken by Chris to the scene of the crime. It's there that David finds out that Billy betrayed Chris' tribe members by going there with Billy not being a member of Chris's aborigine tribe. It's also revealed to David that he himself has some kind of spiritual connection with the Austrailan aborigines as both Charlie and his step-father Rev. Burton,David Parslow, told him.

The stage is now set for the great and final cleansing cycle that David's been seeing in both his night-time dreams and day-time visions. It comes in the form of a massive tidal wave rolling out of the Pacific Ocean into the Australian coast city of Sydney and then submerges the entire continent.

Q: What's an example of a movie review?
An example of a movie review is here: Wow, after trashing the disk of Timo Roses "Rout City" after about 15 Minutes (South Park is about more than meaningless cursing... I guess some people just don't get it) I was interested in this movie. I read quite some positive stuff and the packaging and look of the movie seemed far from the total trash I expected after "Rout city".

Surprise: The movie isn't total trash but the problem seems to be exactly that. Timo Rose tries to walk in the footsteps of German Horror/Splatter Cinema like Olaf Ittenbach and the likes. That means "Barricade" is in parts extremely gory and detailed. The gore FX are not really believable but OK, the acting is OK but in some cases plain sucks. The hillbilly chick in the opening sequence is ridiculous and doesn't get better till she's shot.

So what is the problem... the movie is gory, has a typical German underground vibe (including the classic booby shots in blood), OK FX and a modern feel to it like the packaging already promised?!

1. The script is total BS. You get a typical hillbilly/lost in the woods story with some guys+gal camping out and meeting a degenerated hillbilly family. Everything is just leading towards the torture/mutilation scenes and seems unbelievably random and pointless. This is the first thing that makes "Barricade" half-hearted.

2. Random is also the perfect description for a lot of the camera work (I liked the repetitive cut to the tweezers in the extended booby torture scene... either they had no material or the editor works in a hardware store). Even worse the editing... sure, its modern and far better than a lot of other movies in the genre but its RANDOM. You got an overuse of that typical exposure effect everywhere and with no meaning ... its just there... all the time. Then there's some grainy/noisy film look which also is just thrown in here and there for the sake of it, I don't get the meaning.

3. Like the fore-mentioned effects there is a lot of repetitive stuff in here. For example most of the kills are edited with multiple repetitions of stabbing and punching. Its OK once but here its annoying and fake, especially towards the end. Annoying also attributes the "music" which is permanently used without any change in the background. It doesn't take long until it makes the movie hardly bearable.

4. From all this comes the biggest problem of this movie (and many others in my opinion). If you make a splatter movie with trashy feel its pretty idiotic to polish it with special FX and new school editing. It looks like they take it way too serious. Its no fun because the decent gore FX are plain wasted in this context. And where the classic gore FX are OK the computer FX in scenes like the stabbing in the mouth or the gunshots in the ending look rather silly(and 3D splatter mostly sucks to me even in movies with a budget and decent 3D artists).

I often wondered if the time of serious splatter movies is over and "Barricade" is just another example it might be time to put it in the tomb. Its no fun, has no character and is too trashy for its look. The script is a cheap try on "Wrong Turn" and "TCM" leading absolutely nowhere. You can take that literally... the ending is just there and as random as many other things here ("I love you" in a splatter flick... come on!!). "Barricade" tries to incorporate a lot and fails...you can sure fast-forward through this movie for some extensive disembowelment, acid face melting,nipple pinching and classic Friday the 13th style stabbing of a couple while fingering in a tent (bloody boobies hooray!). But its really hard to get through this. Total failure especially because you can see it could have been something.

Q: What's an example of a movie review?
An example of a movie review is here:
Nikolai Gogol's story "Viy" has been filmed again and released to home video in the US via Faith Films.

The original story concerns a priest who has to watch over the body of a witch with only his faith to protect him. Greatly expanded and set in America, though clearly filmed in Russia (the houses,clothing and furnishing are all wrong despite the English signs), this is an odd film that doesn't really work.Part of it is the weird setting that tries very hard to be backwoods America but clearly isn't.There are also some weird, intentionally oblique moments as the main character being a reporter at the start and a priest a short time later. I'm not sure why they did that, even after watching the making of piece on the DVD) The other problem is the dubbing which is beyond awful. Its done in such away that everyone speaks when their lips are not on camera- or if they are the voices don't even remotely match the lip flaps. I don't know if its Faith Films fault or that of the producers who made the film hoping to dump into the West (revealed in the making of piece).

The film isn't very good. As I've said it has all sorts of technical issues that just make this an odd ball curio. Despite some really good looking horror images the film never works as a horror film. As film to engender faith its much too confused in this retelling to amount to make anyone feel anyone closer to god.

Given the choice I'd give it a pass, even at a bargain bin price. My advice would be to find the 1960's version of the tale called Viy which will bring both some shivers and some understanding about a belief in god.