DVD Releases for Feb. 19, 2013

 Rating: 73/100Dave’s 3-Word Review:Slow, but Chilling It takes a lot for anyone to truly call a horror film genuinely scary. It can be creepy all that it wants and have pop-out moments that more or less get regarded as tacky cop-out moments. Some of us don’t care how tacky a horror film is, and just want those pop-out moments and a tub-full of gore. Others want a movie that will challenge the rest and actually give us something terrifying for once. “Sinister” was one of the few films in the past few years that has been regarded as actually scary, but is it really?Ellison Oswalt (Ethan Hawke) is a true crime novelist that is on the cusp of a new story that could revitalize his career. So, he up and moved to a small home that was also the scene of a crime where a family was hung by their necks on the tree in the backyard. While moving in, he found a box of 8mm movie reels in the attic. He watched the videos, and found a more grisly truth, which was that this house was part of a serial killer’s routine, and somehow these tapes found their way back to the original house. Initially, he watched the films as research into his next book, but the more he watched them, the more strange things began to show up around his house. Can he escape from this alive? Watch to find out.There are elements to this movie that just scream unoriginal. There is found footage that the main character “found”, there is a seemingly haunted house where inanimate objects seem to have a mind of their own, the main antagonist is a demon-like-thing that harasses Ellison and his family (more so Ellison) to no end. While it may seem unoriginal at times, there was also a part of this film that really feels fresh and new.“Sinister” is purposefully slow. Taking things slow in the beginning is what makes some of the most frightening movies exactly that. They are aware of the formula that typical horror films take, and they use that formula to their advantage. We, as an audience, await certain things to scare us, and this movie knows how to actually make those certain things surprising, and not predictable. Sure, the first half of the film is incredibly slow and nothing really happens other than a man researching ideas for his books and finding appalling video reels. Things do get very interesting towards the middle, though.The unpredictable nature of this film is very key. Being predictable means failing at producing genuine scares, other than pop-out moments at random intervals. This movie does everything right in the scare factor, and it also includes some gore and even more creepiness. This is a horror film that people will be talking about, if they haven’t been already. It is scary.The main antagonist is incredibly spooky. He says no words, he just stands there with a white, demonic face, and observes. He just observes, and the very sight of him will make your skin crawl. After watching the movie, you might be looking around with a flashlight in the dark to make sure this…thing…isn’t with you. That is a powerful thing for horror films, and they should all strive to have that effect.Now, a lot of people are going to give this film a hard time for being slow. So many people just can’t understand the meaning of taking things slow in the horror genre. All people want to see is blood and guts a lot of the time, but that isn’t scary! All that is, is just disgusting. You should want something that will stick in your mind, long after you go to bed. You want nightmares.It’s definitely interesting, and it has the proper scares, but it is far from perfection. It is unpredictable, but it is also not perfectly unique either. As mentioned above, it has stereotypical horror-type things involved, things that are likely to turn people away. The acting was good, but not phenomenal, the editing and writing was actually very well done, and the movie has good dark vibe going on.If this sounds like you, then make your way to the Blu-Ray and DVD shelf on Feb. 19, when “Sinister” is released.  Rating: 32/100Dave’s 3-Word Review:SyFy’s Typical GarbageWhat happens when you take a potentially great idea for a film, mix it with several bad ideas, and even worse visual effects? If you guessed a SyFy Original Movie, you would be right. Now, these movies are typically founded on either a good or bad idea, but regardless of the foundation, the rest of the movie just drowns out any positives it may have once had. “Seeds of Destruction”, formally titled “The Terror Beneath”, actually had an intriguing and seemingly never-before seen idea at the core of the film. Was that enough, however, to distract you from the rest of the predictable SyFy vomit? Unfortunately not.Joe (Jesse Moss) and Kate (Luisa D’Oliveira) are two environmentalists that get caught up in one of the worst disasters that have ever struck our nation…the killer plants taking over the world. Let’s back up a bit. Before the plants took over the world, they held magical healing properties. As one of the seeds was getting ready to be sold, gunshots are fired, leaving an uncontrolled seed to plant itself, causing the dangerous and rapid growth of plants everywhere. This seed was apparently one of the original seeds that was found in Adam and Eve’s Garden of Eden, and if the seed is in a controlled environment, then all is good. If the seed is in an uncontrolled environment, death is bound to occur. Basically, these people must find a way to stop the growth of the plants in order to save people’s lives.Somewhere deep at the core of this film is a potentially fantastic idea. We have been teased for years that the next Indiana Jones film would either be about finding Atlantis or the Garden of Eden. The Garden of Eden is a very popular subject that hasn’t really been shown as the main subject of too many movies, especially anything modern. To expand on that, the Garden of Eden was hidden in the bible, never to be found again. So how else to regain what was lost, but to build again? That part of the movie made sense, and it was an incredible idea for them. The movie was also unpredictable, which is hard to say for a lot of SyFy films. Obviously, the plants would just multiply when hit by missiles, bullets, and fire, so how else do they destroy it? Guess you’ll just have to watch to find out.Now, just because there was an interesting idea in there, didn’t make it obvious to everyone else. Instead of keeping things simple, where it should have stayed, the movie took it way too far, and said in an uncontrolled environment, the plants would lash out. I understand to a degree what they were going for. There needs to be repercussions on planting things in places where they shouldn’t be planted, but in a religious light, if the land is improper or unholy, the seed just wouldn’t work, it wouldn’t turn evil. It is a pure and perfect plant, nothing bad can happen with them, instead…nothing should have happened whatsoever. But of course, we can’t expect every movie to know exactly what they were doing; they just did their best to make things look cool.Did it? No, the movie didn’t look cool, because as it happens with every other SyFy Original Movie ever made, they try way too hard to capsize on the amount of CGI allowed. It looks tremendously bad. I just can’t stress this enough, SyFy tries way too hard on their movies. If I were to have made the film, it would go something like this: “A couple try to recreate the Garden of Eden when they find long lost seeds that came from the original garden. However, it looks as though their plans are foiled when the FBI learns of what they have in their possession, so they must make a run for it”. The movie would probably also have a lot of religious aspects to it, much like Indiana Jones did.The only reason you would want to check this film out is if you are actually just a fan of SyFy’s work or just like cheesy, tacky plots that are honestly terrible. If that doesn’t sound like you, it would be better for you to avoid “Seeds of Destruction” when it comes out on Feb. 19!  Rating: 18/100Dave’s 3-Word Review:A Boring HangoverA good source of wholesome, family-oriented kids films used to be found on the Nickelodeon network. Movies like “Good Burger” and “Clockstoppers” are prime examples of good, clean fun that could be entertaining from all ages. Nickelodeon has recently been creeping up to the line of what is acceptable and not, redefining the entire network. Even “Spongebob Squarepants” was accused of being subtly too explicit for children. Nickelodeon’s newest film, “Fun Size” is definitely too mature for young kids, and even creeps further up to the line of inappropriate for teenagers.Victoria Justice plays Wren, a girl who wants to go to a Halloween party that a cute guy will be hosting. Her plans, however, are ruined when her mother forces her to look after her younger brother, Albert. Enter the twists and turns of adventure and comedy as Albert goes missing. No matter how adult or childlike this film is, it still maintains its level of simplicity that Nickelodeon often brings to the table. It is a story that we have seen a thousand times before. Take away the drinking and amnesia, and you have “The Hangover” when it came to plot, which is a large group of friends running into obstacles to get to a common goal. That’s it, that is your story.There were just too many things that this movie did not need. There was a lot of language in this film, for being a young adult movie, including a couple usages of the “S” word, and even some hints at the “F” bomb, as well as every other word on the parental no-no list. Secondly, there are some clear sexual innuendo moments throughout the movie. Now that is fine for so many other movies, but it felt out of place because of that simple plot. That sort of plot really is seen in mostly kids’ films, so there was something that felt very off about the movie as a whole.We also must remember that this is a seasonal movie. While other films were popping up in the theater marked with the “horror” genre, this movie showed up as well, being an adventure/comedy. In the long run, it really didn’t have much of a fight against horror films in the month of October. That being said, it did make sense. There are such things as Halloween parties that kids want to go to, that part is believable. Another believable factor is that kids will probably enjoy this more than they should, because it is inappropriate. Kids love inappropriate things. For the rest of us, we just aren’t going to like it all that much.It has no real home for an audience. Its target audience is probably teens, and they would probably be the ones to enjoy it out of everyone else. Whether it is appropriate or not is up to the discretion of their parents. Even then, the kids might watch it once and forget about it the next week because for anyone, the movie is just boring.The plot is so simple that it is boring. Don’t even think about having your mind wander off for a minute, and don’t use the bathroom, because you will lose any fraction of an interest you had in watching the movie. You will be so happy to think about something else that you will stop watching it altogether. So, it is best just to avoid it altogether.“Fun Size” comes to Blu-Ray and DVD on Feb. 19. So when you see it, don’t let the cool-looking DVD covers fool you. Skip it and move onto something else! View the list »
 Rating: 99/100Dave’s 3-Word Review:Unbelievably mind-blowingNot too long ago, the Golden Globe awards were aired on TV, awarding plenty of deserving films and television shows alike. While we have to await the results of the Oscars next month, we know that “Argo” won two Golden Globes, one of which was for best motion picture in the drama category. Fortunately for the rest of us, when something wins an award like this, we typically get to see more of the film in our local theaters, and as it happens, “Argo” returned to theaters nationwide. So the main question on everyone’s mind is, did this film deserve the award it was given? In short, yes.“Argo” tells the incredible true story of a group of brave men and women, one in particular, who risks death in a rescue mission of the century. It takes place during the Iranian Hostage Crisis that made major news in the late 1970’s, early 1980’s holding American citizens hostage at the American embassy for over an entire year. Ben Affleck plays Tony Mendez, the man with the plan. In order to save six Americans that have managed to get into hiding, he suggests putting together a fake movie, fake screenplay, fake identities for everyone, and an elaborate backstory that will ultimately get them out of their situation.The story goes like this, Tony Mendez plans to go to Iran as a producer for a movie. He and a group of six other members of the crew to a movie called “Argo” are scouting locations for this film. Once they put together their notes, they simply board a plane and leave Iran. However, things get quite cloudy and suspenseful as the film progresses.How many films based on a true story do you know of that depend on the fact that it is a true story? Does the movie work on its own, or does it need that extra element to give it a boost? For the most part, movies based on true stories really do need that extra element, and it is unfortunate. However, “Argo” didn’t ever need to tell the audience that it was based off of a true story. It helps heighten the level of suspense and awe, but just the idea alone is original and very interesting. The way it is compiled together will grind your teeth at the level of unforgiving suspense, because in real life it was a risk. They were gambling with their lives, and you can feel that when you watch this movie. Somehow you have no idea what is going to happen in the movie regardless of how much you know about the true story. It really is riveting.Ben Affleck has been critiqued rather negatively through his life attacking his abilities in acting, but it has become steadily more obvious that his talents in directing are superb. He knows how to pick a project when he sits at the director’s chair. His acting in the film was also fantastic, as were all of the performances. It would be a crime not to note how well Bryan Cranston, John Goodman, Alan Arkin, and Victor Garber played their part, but at the same time it isn’t so much of a surprise given their extensive history of film.Also note that the casting supervisor knew exactly what they were doing, as did the person responsible for the camera work. When the film eventually gives the audience comparative shots of the movie and real people and events, you can tell then, if you couldn’t already, that it was spot on. Everything about this film from beginning to end was done incredibly well. There may be parts here and there during the middle of the film that feel slower, failing to get to the point, but those are very slim to none at all.“Argo” is still in theaters today, so make sure you check this out before it leaves! 

Movies newsletter

There were a few films that came out today (Feb. 12, 2013), but which ones do you think you will be in the mood to watch? Two in particular made waves in theater, which were "Argo" and "Sinister", but which ones of the four are the best? The movies released today can be found below:

Related topics

Advertisement
  1. Argo
  2. Fun Size
  3. Sinister
  4. Seeds of Destruction

Look at the list for reviews on each of these films to help you decide on which movies you should check out...if any.

View the list
  •  Rating: 99/100Dave’s 3-Word Review:Unbelievably mind-blowingNot too long ago, the Golden Globe awards were aired on TV, awarding plenty of deserving films and television shows alike. While we have to await the results of the Oscars next month, we know that “Argo” won two Golden Globes, one of which was for best motion picture in the drama category. Fortunately for the rest of us, when something wins an award like this, we typically get to see more of the film in our local theaters, and as it happens, “Argo” returned to theaters nationwide. So the main question on everyone’s mind is, did this film deserve the award it was given? In short, yes.“Argo” tells the incredible true story of a group of brave men and women, one in particular, who risks death in a rescue mission of the century. It takes place during the Iranian Hostage Crisis that made major news in the late 1970’s, early 1980’s holding American citizens hostage at the American embassy for over an entire year. Ben Affleck plays Tony Mendez, the man with the plan. In order to save six Americans that have managed to get into hiding, he suggests putting together a fake movie, fake screenplay, fake identities for everyone, and an elaborate backstory that will ultimately get them out of their situation.The story goes like this, Tony Mendez plans to go to Iran as a producer for a movie. He and a group of six other members of the crew to a movie called “Argo” are scouting locations for this film. Once they put together their notes, they simply board a plane and leave Iran. However, things get quite cloudy and suspenseful as the film progresses.How many films based on a true story do you know of that depend on the fact that it is a true story? Does the movie work on its own, or does it need that extra element to give it a boost? For the most part, movies based on true stories really do need that extra element, and it is unfortunate. However, “Argo” didn’t ever need to tell the audience that it was based off of a true story. It helps heighten the level of suspense and awe, but just the idea alone is original and very interesting. The way it is compiled together will grind your teeth at the level of unforgiving suspense, because in real life it was a risk. They were gambling with their lives, and you can feel that when you watch this movie. Somehow you have no idea what is going to happen in the movie regardless of how much you know about the true story. It really is riveting.Ben Affleck has been critiqued rather negatively through his life attacking his abilities in acting, but it has become steadily more obvious that his talents in directing are superb. He knows how to pick a project when he sits at the director’s chair. His acting in the film was also fantastic, as were all of the performances. It would be a crime not to note how well Bryan Cranston, John Goodman, Alan Arkin, and Victor Garber played their part, but at the same time it isn’t so much of a surprise given their extensive history of film.Also note that the casting supervisor knew exactly what they were doing, as did the person responsible for the camera work. When the film eventually gives the audience comparative shots of the movie and real people and events, you can tell then, if you couldn’t already, that it was spot on. Everything about this film from beginning to end was done incredibly well. There may be parts here and there during the middle of the film that feel slower, failing to get to the point, but those are very slim to none at all.“Argo” is still in theaters today, so make sure you check this out before it leaves! 
  •  Rating: 18/100Dave’s 3-Word Review:A Boring HangoverA good source of wholesome, family-oriented kids films used to be found on the Nickelodeon network. Movies like “Good Burger” and “Clockstoppers” are prime examples of good, clean fun that could be entertaining from all ages. Nickelodeon has recently been creeping up to the line of what is acceptable and not, redefining the entire network. Even “Spongebob Squarepants” was accused of being subtly too explicit for children. Nickelodeon’s newest film, “Fun Size” is definitely too mature for young kids, and even creeps further up to the line of inappropriate for teenagers.Victoria Justice plays Wren, a girl who wants to go to a Halloween party that a cute guy will be hosting. Her plans, however, are ruined when her mother forces her to look after her younger brother, Albert. Enter the twists and turns of adventure and comedy as Albert goes missing. No matter how adult or childlike this film is, it still maintains its level of simplicity that Nickelodeon often brings to the table. It is a story that we have seen a thousand times before. Take away the drinking and amnesia, and you have “The Hangover” when it came to plot, which is a large group of friends running into obstacles to get to a common goal. That’s it, that is your story.There were just too many things that this movie did not need. There was a lot of language in this film, for being a young adult movie, including a couple usages of the “S” word, and even some hints at the “F” bomb, as well as every other word on the parental no-no list. Secondly, there are some clear sexual innuendo moments throughout the movie. Now that is fine for so many other movies, but it felt out of place because of that simple plot. That sort of plot really is seen in mostly kids’ films, so there was something that felt very off about the movie as a whole.We also must remember that this is a seasonal movie. While other films were popping up in the theater marked with the “horror” genre, this movie showed up as well, being an adventure/comedy. In the long run, it really didn’t have much of a fight against horror films in the month of October. That being said, it did make sense. There are such things as Halloween parties that kids want to go to, that part is believable. Another believable factor is that kids will probably enjoy this more than they should, because it is inappropriate. Kids love inappropriate things. For the rest of us, we just aren’t going to like it all that much.It has no real home for an audience. Its target audience is probably teens, and they would probably be the ones to enjoy it out of everyone else. Whether it is appropriate or not is up to the discretion of their parents. Even then, the kids might watch it once and forget about it the next week because for anyone, the movie is just boring.The plot is so simple that it is boring. Don’t even think about having your mind wander off for a minute, and don’t use the bathroom, because you will lose any fraction of an interest you had in watching the movie. You will be so happy to think about something else that you will stop watching it altogether. So, it is best just to avoid it altogether.“Fun Size” comes to Blu-Ray and DVD on Feb. 19. So when you see it, don’t let the cool-looking DVD covers fool you. Skip it and move onto something else! 
  •  Rating: 32/100Dave’s 3-Word Review:SyFy’s Typical GarbageWhat happens when you take a potentially great idea for a film, mix it with several bad ideas, and even worse visual effects? If you guessed a SyFy Original Movie, you would be right. Now, these movies are typically founded on either a good or bad idea, but regardless of the foundation, the rest of the movie just drowns out any positives it may have once had. “Seeds of Destruction”, formally titled “The Terror Beneath”, actually had an intriguing and seemingly never-before seen idea at the core of the film. Was that enough, however, to distract you from the rest of the predictable SyFy vomit? Unfortunately not.Joe (Jesse Moss) and Kate (Luisa D’Oliveira) are two environmentalists that get caught up in one of the worst disasters that have ever struck our nation…the killer plants taking over the world. Let’s back up a bit. Before the plants took over the world, they held magical healing properties. As one of the seeds was getting ready to be sold, gunshots are fired, leaving an uncontrolled seed to plant itself, causing the dangerous and rapid growth of plants everywhere. This seed was apparently one of the original seeds that was found in Adam and Eve’s Garden of Eden, and if the seed is in a controlled environment, then all is good. If the seed is in an uncontrolled environment, death is bound to occur. Basically, these people must find a way to stop the growth of the plants in order to save people’s lives.Somewhere deep at the core of this film is a potentially fantastic idea. We have been teased for years that the next Indiana Jones film would either be about finding Atlantis or the Garden of Eden. The Garden of Eden is a very popular subject that hasn’t really been shown as the main subject of too many movies, especially anything modern. To expand on that, the Garden of Eden was hidden in the bible, never to be found again. So how else to regain what was lost, but to build again? That part of the movie made sense, and it was an incredible idea for them. The movie was also unpredictable, which is hard to say for a lot of SyFy films. Obviously, the plants would just multiply when hit by missiles, bullets, and fire, so how else do they destroy it? Guess you’ll just have to watch to find out.Now, just because there was an interesting idea in there, didn’t make it obvious to everyone else. Instead of keeping things simple, where it should have stayed, the movie took it way too far, and said in an uncontrolled environment, the plants would lash out. I understand to a degree what they were going for. There needs to be repercussions on planting things in places where they shouldn’t be planted, but in a religious light, if the land is improper or unholy, the seed just wouldn’t work, it wouldn’t turn evil. It is a pure and perfect plant, nothing bad can happen with them, instead…nothing should have happened whatsoever. But of course, we can’t expect every movie to know exactly what they were doing; they just did their best to make things look cool.Did it? No, the movie didn’t look cool, because as it happens with every other SyFy Original Movie ever made, they try way too hard to capsize on the amount of CGI allowed. It looks tremendously bad. I just can’t stress this enough, SyFy tries way too hard on their movies. If I were to have made the film, it would go something like this: “A couple try to recreate the Garden of Eden when they find long lost seeds that came from the original garden. However, it looks as though their plans are foiled when the FBI learns of what they have in their possession, so they must make a run for it”. The movie would probably also have a lot of religious aspects to it, much like Indiana Jones did.The only reason you would want to check this film out is if you are actually just a fan of SyFy’s work or just like cheesy, tacky plots that are honestly terrible. If that doesn’t sound like you, it would be better for you to avoid “Seeds of Destruction” when it comes out on Feb. 19! 
  •  Rating: 73/100Dave’s 3-Word Review:Slow, but Chilling It takes a lot for anyone to truly call a horror film genuinely scary. It can be creepy all that it wants and have pop-out moments that more or less get regarded as tacky cop-out moments. Some of us don’t care how tacky a horror film is, and just want those pop-out moments and a tub-full of gore. Others want a movie that will challenge the rest and actually give us something terrifying for once. “Sinister” was one of the few films in the past few years that has been regarded as actually scary, but is it really?Ellison Oswalt (Ethan Hawke) is a true crime novelist that is on the cusp of a new story that could revitalize his career. So, he up and moved to a small home that was also the scene of a crime where a family was hung by their necks on the tree in the backyard. While moving in, he found a box of 8mm movie reels in the attic. He watched the videos, and found a more grisly truth, which was that this house was part of a serial killer’s routine, and somehow these tapes found their way back to the original house. Initially, he watched the films as research into his next book, but the more he watched them, the more strange things began to show up around his house. Can he escape from this alive? Watch to find out.There are elements to this movie that just scream unoriginal. There is found footage that the main character “found”, there is a seemingly haunted house where inanimate objects seem to have a mind of their own, the main antagonist is a demon-like-thing that harasses Ellison and his family (more so Ellison) to no end. While it may seem unoriginal at times, there was also a part of this film that really feels fresh and new.“Sinister” is purposefully slow. Taking things slow in the beginning is what makes some of the most frightening movies exactly that. They are aware of the formula that typical horror films take, and they use that formula to their advantage. We, as an audience, await certain things to scare us, and this movie knows how to actually make those certain things surprising, and not predictable. Sure, the first half of the film is incredibly slow and nothing really happens other than a man researching ideas for his books and finding appalling video reels. Things do get very interesting towards the middle, though.The unpredictable nature of this film is very key. Being predictable means failing at producing genuine scares, other than pop-out moments at random intervals. This movie does everything right in the scare factor, and it also includes some gore and even more creepiness. This is a horror film that people will be talking about, if they haven’t been already. It is scary.The main antagonist is incredibly spooky. He says no words, he just stands there with a white, demonic face, and observes. He just observes, and the very sight of him will make your skin crawl. After watching the movie, you might be looking around with a flashlight in the dark to make sure this…thing…isn’t with you. That is a powerful thing for horror films, and they should all strive to have that effect.Now, a lot of people are going to give this film a hard time for being slow. So many people just can’t understand the meaning of taking things slow in the horror genre. All people want to see is blood and guts a lot of the time, but that isn’t scary! All that is, is just disgusting. You should want something that will stick in your mind, long after you go to bed. You want nightmares.It’s definitely interesting, and it has the proper scares, but it is far from perfection. It is unpredictable, but it is also not perfectly unique either. As mentioned above, it has stereotypical horror-type things involved, things that are likely to turn people away. The acting was good, but not phenomenal, the editing and writing was actually very well done, and the movie has good dark vibe going on.If this sounds like you, then make your way to the Blu-Ray and DVD shelf on Feb. 19, when “Sinister” is released. 
View the list
Suggested by the author:

, South Bend Movie Examiner

David Gilleand (24) is a film enthusiast and an established movie critic that has been featured on video sites such as Veoh.com and Nudia.tv. He has directly worked with names like Clifton Armstrong who worked as an Assistant Editor for "Jon & Kate Plus 8" as well as Jay Glatfelter from the...

Advertisement

Today's top buzz...