david_blakemore

After reading the reviews of the film and hearing what one of my mates had to say about it, I figured that this was not a film that was a must see, and I that I shouldn't go rushing to the cinema to see it.

When I did see it, yes I will hold my hands up to this one, it was better then I thought it would be. Ok it's not the BEST horror film to be made, and it does have it's flaws. The worst thing about this film is that it nicks a bit from Cube, anyone who has seen both films will know straight away which part, also the it seems to have nicked a bit from 28 days later.

One flaw that does bother me (possible spoilers) why does it take so long for Rain to become infected with the virus, when another member of her team becomes infected as soon as he get bitten. Another one is Alice when shes faced with the infected dogs, surely no one is that accurate with a gun, even if they are good shots.

Overall once I started watching I couldn't turn it off, (That doesn't normally happen with me). Milla Jovovich is better then I thought, I have to admit I thought she was such a very pretty face who couldn't act (how wrong I was), hopefully the 2nd one will be much better then the1st because there is a lot of potential here.

I'll be honest right now, I am not the biggest fan of Westerns, although there are a couple that I like which I won't go into.

I personally thought this was a very over rated film. The reason for this is because there is another Western which was said to have influened Unforgiven, which was Tom Horn. Anyone who hasn't seen Tom Horn should do so.

If you believe the reviews that Tom Horn got from it's 1st realise then you would be very naive. I can honestly say that Unforgiven was given the credit that Tom Horn didn't.

I don't have too many complaints about Unforgiven, the plot wasn't bad, the acting was pretty good but I didn't think it was the classic that I was meant to belive it was.

I can only really give it 7 out of 10

** SPOILERS **

I'm must say sorry in advance to all the Nicole Kidman or The Others fans out there, but I think this is such an over rated that the only good thing about this film is the ending.

Why do I think it's so bad, well for a start this has 6th Sense (for those who had not seen the others and seen the 6th Sense) written all over it, and the ending is more or less the same. Another thing that bugged me was Nicole Kidman, I have nothing against her, as I think she is a top draw actress, BUT in the scenes with Chris Eccelston (and why he is not a star I'll never know) Mr Eccelston dominates the screen when he is on. Eccelston made this more interesting for me to watch, and it's a shame he was not in more often.

The whole film looks like it has been copied from 6th Sense (which is a much better film), but the people who made it, and made little changes in it, and marketed it to make it look a new idea.

One question that has stuck in my mind since I 1st saw this film, and that is what would the reaction be if this was a Hollywood blockbuster with a couple of A/B stars and an average director or maybe even a top quality director like Fincher or Scorsese?

I really enjoyed the film and thought it was interesting that we never find out who built the cube and why. Maybe this is for the better but it would highly likely that if this was a Hollywood film then we would find out.

I would recommend this film to anyone who enjoys a bit of sci-fi and a thriller, this is a superb film which reveals humans at their worst, but mind you thats the name of the game, testing morals while trying to escape something no one knows

Don't get me wrong I love Martin Scorsese's films and I regard him as one of THE BEST film makers around today, but one thing does bug me, and that is he used Robert De Niro so many times in his films. I'm not saying that he is a bad actor but you need to watch a De Niro film that is not directed by Scorsese.

Lets take the Deer Hunter, reagrded as a classic by many and when I started a film project I wanted to look at Scorsese and a tutor suggested I look at De Niro without Scorsese which I did. After watching the Deer Hunter I realised that De Niro was an over rated actor who Scorsese had made big, (in the same way that Spielberg made Harrison Ford a big name).

Taxi Driver is a fantasic and ugly film that does not hold back, and well done to Scorsese for making this film, but the one thing I feel is that Scorsese should not have used De Niro, Harvey Kietel out acts him in the scenes they are in, (Kietel did the same in Mean Streets).

The actor I think he should have used was Steve McQueen, this would have made a very interesting combination as Scorsese films are about loners, and Steve McQueen it could be argued created an existental hero. While the film is excellent in itself I think the McQueen-Scorsese partnership would have been interesting to watch, (McQueen predicted that Scorsese would be big after watching his 1st film). Still this is an excellent film and I give this a 9 out of 10

I know that there are some people who don't like this film for whatever reason, all I can say is that I think it's a superb film, and I don't think Bryan Singer has made a better then this, (This includes Usual suspets and X-men).

I thing I love anout this film is that it gets under your skin, which not every film can do, and the story as well. Ok it is unlikely that you will reconise someone from a 40 year old photo. It has to be said though that the story is excellent, and this is one of my favourite films.

Such a shame that the last two films Steve McQueen made didn't do very well, although it was probably a lot fairer on The Hunter which had the potential to be a great film, but the plot lost it way a bit. Tom Horn is considered to be one of the last great westerns, which Unforgiven was influenced by and got the recognition that Tom Horn didn't.

The scenery is amazing especially the shot of the court with the sunset as the verdict is been given. This is such a great film, nothing more, nothing less.