- Casino Royale Review
- Carrie (1976)
- Two-Lane Blacktop (1971)
- Trainspotting (1996)
- Rain Man (1988)
- Fatal Attraction (1987)
- Targets (1968)
- An Education (2009)
- Mirror, The (1974)
- Fargo (1996)
- Fight Club (1999)
- Do The Right Thing (1989)
- Report (1967)
- Is "The Sting" The Best Gambling Film Ever Made?
- Pink Flamingos (1972)
- Ox-Bow Incident, The (1943), Or 28 Angry Men
- Rome, Open City (1945)
- Spring in a Small Town (1948)
- Drive (2011)
- Vinyl (1965)
- Seconds (1966)
- Rosemary's Baby (1968)
- A Hollywood Invasion of Casino Halls
- Thin Man, The (1934)
- In The Heat of the Night (1967)
- All In: The Poker Movie, Player’s Best Tricks
- Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956)
- 1001 Club - Skyfall (2012)
- 1001 Club - When Harry Met Sally... (1988)
- 1001 Club - Rain Man (1988)
Martin (1977) * Worst Hit *
MARTIN SUCKS (not the poster tho')
Genre: Vampire Horror Drama Thriller
Starring: John Amplas (Day of the Dead), Lincoln Maazel
Directed By: George A. Romero (Creepshow • Monkey Shines)
Overview: A young man moves in with his uncle in Pensylvania. This uncle, set on curing his vampiric hunger, makes no qualms about what should happen should Martin kill again.
Performance:
I was really glad to See Tom Savini in this one. Sadly his character did nothing for the plot, and he was awkward, but that's ok, NO ONE in this can act! John Amplas as Martin was less than decent. The old man, Lincoln Maazel, looking like a European Colonel Sanders and speaking his words like they were scripture didn't help either, but the worst had to be the woman who played his granddaughter, Martin's cousin. She was just outrageously bad. See what happens when you cast your wife in a role?! Bad Romero! Were it not for the comparatively passable talent of the woman who played Martin's 'love interest', well I'd probably have turned it off half way, sparing you this rant.
Rating: 4
Cinematography:
Son of a bitch crappy movie was shot on 16mm. This does 2 things: 1.) Inspires us 16mm indie film hopefuls in the belief that what we make could indeed get a following. 2.) Makes every other viewer realize that 16mm is garbage and they shouldn't watch it. Thanks for nuthin', Romero. Your use of your buddy's living room and bedroom, no matter how stark and crappy, was a generous donation. Maybe you can get away with saying the cinematography was intentionally bland, but I'm not buying it. Long, boring shots of people walking up to a train? You and me both know your crew didn't know what it was doing. The ounce of gore and the occasional B&W artistic shot kept you out of the mire of 'worst ever'.
Rating: 4
Script:
"Martin...Martin...Martin...Martin...Martin...Martin...Martin...Martin...Martin..."
- voiceover repeated over and over AND OVER AND OVER
Say what you will about the everyday conversations we have at home, they can be useful yes, but only to the people HAVING THEM. God! Shut up! The only bits worth listening to were the love interest lady next door and occasionally the moments where Martin's talking about his condition over the phone to some radio jockey... it most certainly wasn't the victims fumbling around explaining each of their actions for our benefit. "I'm picking up the phone to call 911 now!" ... Seriously.
Rating: 4
Plot:
With a tagline like "A Vampire for Our Age of Disbelief", I didn't think that meant slice-of-life 'hardly a vampire' film. The basic premise is this: Martin is the kind of guy who drinks blood. He's not the kind of vampire you see below (THAT would need a budget), he's a regular kid with a craving, and he kills to survive. He's been sent to his uncle's to live under his watchful eye cause he was caught killing once. The uncle is a man of the old ways who knows that his family is cursed with the occasional thirst Martin has, and is his self-appointed keeper. Martin can work and come and go as he pleases, but should he kill again, the uncle will destroy him. That's a pretty liberal household if you ask me, but when you thro in the useless characters of the cousin and whoever Tom Savini's supposed to be this becomes some convoluted useless garbage with an ending that does nothing to hurry its ass up.
Rating: 3
Mood:
If 'Post-Modern Gen-X Blasé Diluted Apathetic' is what Romero was going for with this, well he nailed it. If you like photographic art exhibits of brick walls, beat up vans and ill-framed ceiling corners, well you might like this. I think those that like this indie film like it because, except for the vampirism slant, the drama is very 'normal life'. Of course for me, all I can think of is a Hitchcock quote - "What is drama but life with the dull bits cut out?" And this, my friends, leaves the dull bits in - to the max - not to mention being full of those frustrating "why didn't they just do this?" moments.
Rating: 5
Gnaaar! Still sucks!
Overall Rating: 40% (SUCKS!)
Aftertaste:
There's movies you laugh along with, there's movies you laugh at and then there's Martin, a movie not worthy of either. In fact, it's a movie I begged Girlfriend of Squish to watch with me, in chunks, and even when she sat there in front of the TV, there she was doing something else. I can't blame her.
What I can't grasp is those who like this film. Not just tolerate it, but include it in their list of favourites. Obviously these dolts have never actually seen art, beauty, or know anything about the basics of composition. What the hell is wrong with people?! It's so bad! Spare yourselves!
Well, I read about so many people liking it that I had to ask "What makes it work?"
I promise I won't make fun of you for having liked it. :P
Hmmmm. I watched this film around 1993 and I remember very little about it, but I do remember liking it. Of course my tastes have changed since then and it's entirely possible that upon a new viewing I could agree with your review, but for now it stays on my list of 'likes'. And, since you say it's so horrible and I trust your judgment, I won't likely see it again any time soon. How ironic that your bad review leads to my prolonged good feelings about this movie.