movie

<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0373883/">Halloween (2007)</a>

Opens In South Korea. Unknown

How i saw it. Leaked Workprint DVD Screener.

Plot. After being committed for 17 years, Michael Myers, now a grown man and still very dangerous, escapes from the mental institution (where he was committed as a 10 year old) and he immediately returns to Haddonfield, where he wants to find his baby sister, Laurie. Anyone who crosses his path is in mortal danger.

This film is a remake of <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0077651/">Halloween (1978)</a>

HEAVY SPOILER ALERT REVIEW...........................................

This is the second workprint review that I have done. I was also able to get a copy of Hostel 2 a week early also. I must ask, "What is going on with Dimension Films?"

This is the 2nd leak of a big release film for them this year. I keep wondering who is trying to destroy the studio or is this just greed or revenge. Eli Roth, the director of Hostel 2, believed that the leaked released destroyed the film in the box office. Now with this release will the new Halloween be destroyed on opening weekend or not. All that I know is the rumors that I am reading at the time of this review. That the workprint is not what we well will see on opening day and that the ending is  different than in the workprint.

I am reviewing the workprint.

I have always wondered why I loved the original film. To me it was always a case of revenge. A huge payback for what happened to the young Michael Myers. I always thought that this had been one of the first horror films that I had seen as a child that made me fall in love with the movies.

So when I heard of a remake of this film, my first thought was WTF! After seeing the film, I am glad that they gave the film to Rob Zombie to write and direct. I thought that the film was allot better that I had expected.

The opening few minutes of the film, we see Mike as a boy who likes to kill animals and we see that his home life is just horrible. You see that the boy only gets love from his mother and his so called step-father is a joke. You also see the start of his fascination with wearing a mask. You also see that he loves his baby sister, Laurie.

We see Mike kill his first victim, a school yard bully. You see him kill with the mask on, then when he takes of the mask, he's a kid. This was the start of Halloween night for Mike. As in the original film, he kills his older sisters lover and his sister, he also kills his evil step-father. When his mother returns from work, she see Mike with his baby sister, outside, in the cold, when Michael states, "It's all better now" The aftermath was well directed.

Then you see a young Michael Kill one more time in the hospital and after that his mother, realizes that she has helped to create pure evil, kills herself at her home, while watching home movies with her little boy.

What I also really liked about the film was the music, they even used "Don't Fear the Reaper" as in the original. another part I liked was the small role of Ismael Cruz,m played by Danny Trejo, you see him as a janitor/guard always treat Michael with respect and you see that Michael never hurts him. Its only when disrespect comes to Michael that he kills.

The rest of the film is your typical slasher film. A innocent girl, that, for some unknown reason to her, the killer wants her dead. Over sexed teenagers, that are killed while they are having sex, and the one person, Dr. Sam Loomis, who understands the killer.

It was an excellent choice to select Malcolm McDowell to replace the late, Donald Pleasence, as the role of Michael's surrogate father, Dr. Sam Loomis.

If you want to see a good horror film, then this one will do. Please remember, if you download the workprint, it may not be the same film you see in the movie cinema. Please see it when you can.

Grade B+

(Dr. Loomis.) These eyes will deceive you, they will destroy you. They will take from you, your innocents, your pride, and eventually your soul. These eyes do not see what you and I see. Behind these eyes one finds only blackness, they absence of light, these are of a psychopath.

<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0453451/">Mr. Bean's Holiday</a>

Opens In South Korea on 15 August 2007

How I saw it. DVD Screener.

PLOT. (HUGE SPOILERS) <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0453451/plotsummary">Plot</a>


There are certain films that I like and their are certain films that I do not like. Sad to say Mr. Bean is someone that I have never liked. I feel that our readers from the U.K. will disagree with me but I have never found him funny at all. I watched the film and I really did not laugh much at the film. I can see how people are going to love this film.

If you are a fan of Mr. Bean, then please see this film when it comes to Korea. If you are not, then please pass on this one and wait for a better film.

Grade C-

<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0462538/">IMDB Link</a>

Opens in Korea. 2007.08.23

How I saw it. DVD Screener.

Opening weekend in USA.  $74,036,787 (USA) (29 July 2007) (3,922 Screens)

Plot. <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0462538/synopsis">HEAVY SPOILER ALERT</a>

When the first preview came out for this film last year on April fools day, I did not believe it. I finally believed it when I saw a real coming attraction for the movie. This film has had so many rumors that when it finally had an opening day in the USA, it still seemed like a shock.

Now, to be honest, I am a part time watcher of the TV show. I have not really watched it steady for years. This is why I will keep the review spoiler free.

I have no idea why I actually liked this film. It wasn't that funny at times. It seemed too rushed and way too short. But for some reason I was laughing at the right times and when it was funny it was one of the funniest films I have seen this year.

The drawings were first rate and much better animation that I have usually seen on the tv show. The guest voices were a great surprise and definately added to the joy of the film. After the movie is over, please watch all of the credits. The extras during the credits were a bonus for the casual and serious fan of the tv show.

Please see it when it arrives in Korea.

Grade B

Ned Flanders: Look at that, you can see the four states that border Springfield: Ohio, Nevada, Maine, and Kentucky!
Bart Simpson: Oh yeah. 

D-War Opened. 1 August 2007 (South Korea) How I saw it. CGV Theater. Plot. heavy spoilers. Will be released in USA on 14 September 2007. As a fan of the movies, there has always been one type of film that I have always loved. Sad to say, it is the "Monster" film. One of my first childhood movie memories was the 1956 Godzilla. I knew that it was a man in a rubber suit and, to be honest, I did not care. I have amassed a nice collection of the so called "Monster" films. On quiet, rainy days, I still warm up some popcorn and enjoy films from my childhood. I had heard of "D-War" for many years now, and each time the film had a release date and then the date kept getting pushed back. I kept wondering will this film ever be released. As of today, this is the most expensive Korean Film ever made. With cost rumored to be between 30-100 million dollars, this could even be the biggest risk or failure in Korean film history. To be honest, the film had every reason I should like it, a big monster, great special effects, a somewhat corny story and a huge battle in L.A. I should have loved it but sad to say, I really hated the film. Based on Korea Pop Wars It looks like I will be in the minority here in Korea. The Korean Producer of the film, Showbox, is prediction an opening weekend of 2-2.5 million tickets sold. The main reason that I hated the film was very easy. The acting was just that bad. I do not even mean as bad as "Plan 9 from Outer Space", I actually liked that film. For all of the special effect, the wooden acting just left a bad taste in my mouth. One other reason was the film seemed very rushed at 90 minutes, it had very little plot development and the story, as a whole, just seemed very flat. If you like monsters, then this will be the summer film for you. The film is in English and Korean so please be ready for that. Grade. C-

<a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0800341/">May 18th</a> or HWARYEOHAN HYUGA (or "Splendid Vacation"), it was the  code name the military had for their operations in Gwangju in 1980.

Opened in Korea: 25 July 2007.

How I saw it. CGV

Plot. The story of events leading up to the 1980 Gwangju incident in South Korea.

As I write a review, I try never to bring any of the past hang-ups that I have and try and judge each film. For the most, I can do it. In this case. I can not. A while back one comment asked me why I stated in a preview what i think and what I believe and how the past has make me think and react the way I do. I think that, you the reader, deserve my honest opinion and need to see the bag that I brought with me when I saw this film.

It was 1991 and I was stationed in Camp Carroll, (Waegwan South Korea) and the First Gulf War, had just ended. A friend of mine was going to spend the weekend at one of our Katusa's hometown. (Korean Assigned To US Army)He was really looking forward to it. When he came back it was a different story all together.

To me, my friend just looked very different. I went and asked him, WTF happened? He told me about how all of the town just hated him and they were chased back to his parents place and how they were yelling at him. I then asked what city he went to, he  said "Kwangju" (The unit knew that I was a history major) so he asked me WTF about Kwangju (Gwangju). I explained to him about what had happened and how a lot of people blame the USA for letting that happen. He understood it. Then his KATUSA friend came over, and I went off on him! I yelled WTF? Are you trying to get him killed, you know damn well he nor any US Army can go their, WTF were you thinking. It had never dawned on him that his friend could have gotten into serious trouble. We talked about what had happened and he told me that he had lost a few of his family and how they always thought that there was a mass grave with over 10,000 people buried there. We never talked about that weekend for the rest of the time that I was stationed in Korea.

It left a very bad taste in my mouth and to be honest, to this day, I refuse to ever visit Kwangju again. I had a short stay at Camp Ames (near Kwangju) but I did not react with anyone who lived in that city.

I knew that I was coming back to Korea in early 2005 to work in Korea as a teacher, so i decided to touch up with my studies of Korean History. When I revisited my studies of this subject. I flat out could not believe WTF I was reading.

(Now readers, please remember something. This is version 1 of this review. I have asked and hope that a few people, who are more aware of all of the story for help n editing, so this review may change a few time for historical accuracy.)

Now lets talk about the background of the film.

A huge red flag came up when <a href="http://www.rjkoehler.com/2007/06/26/former-usfk-commander-denies-us-invo... USA INVOLVEMENT</a> article came out.

What I would like to point out are these various comments.

Here’s what Wicham said in his book “Korea on the Brink” (2000):

    Neither Bill Gleysteen nor I knew that the Special Forces brigades had been ordered into Kwangju on May 18. We did know, however, that the ROK 20th and 30th Infantry Divisions, both of which had special training for riot control duty, were being withdrawn by Defense Minister Chu from CFC Operational Control. My permission to withdraw these units was neither sought nor required under the terms of the CFC Agreement. Rhu told me that some units from the 20th Division were being dispatched by ROK authorities to the Kwangju area, but that the 20th Division’s troops had not yet been involved in suppressing the riots.

and this......

Gleysteen’s “Massive Entanglement, Marginal Influence”. Here’s what he has to say on the topic at hand in a nutshell:

The basic source of controversy about the U.S. role in Kwangju was the widespread public assumption that General Wickham in his capacity as head of the Combined Forces Command must have known about the deployment of Korean army troops in the Kwangju region and approved their role. In fact, none of the Korean forces involved in the mayhem on May 18-21 were under Wickham’s operational control. Nor did he or I have any knowledge of what those forces would be ordered to do.


<a href="http://www.dprkstudies.org/2006/05/18/the-kwangju-uprising-5-1-8-oh-il-p...

AND BY USINKOREA.

I think it was Lee Jae-Eui’s accounts of the situation in Kwangju that I found the most difficult to digest.

Most Koreans, except older conservative ones, want you to believe Kwangju was a shining example of resistance to dictatorship by heroic advocates of freedom and democracy —- basically a boomerang interpretation from the “bunch of commie bastards” one the authoritarian government sold after the massacre.

Outsiders, especially foreign reporters, influenced by the global times in which Kwangju 1980 happened, the same people who championed “democratic” uprisings in South and Central American nations and Africa when “socialism” was still deemed a viable alternative to the ills of liberal capitalistic democracy, have also wanted to paint a best or better picture of the protest leaders and members in Kwangju.

But, from bits and pieces I have caught here and there, I can’t swallow this interpretation well.

I can’t bring myself to saying Kwangju was Korea’s Tiananmen.

And what bothers me is that there is a concept worth saving that gets destroyed if we make Kwangju Korea’s Tiananmen:

It is hard enough for mankind to follow the wisdom of Gandhi.

If we dilute it by applying it to situations like Kwangju, it becomes even harder.

Non-violent resistance to oppression — rather than turning to violence and bloodshed - even when right is on your side — even when excessive violence is being used by the authorities against your movement —- is something to be praised and it has been proven to make progress in places like India or the US or the former Soviet Union and so on.

I’m still conflicted about Kwangju 1980 — because I can accept the use of violence by citizens against an oppressive government. I don’t rule out that means altogether.

And I can’t say one way or another if Korea 1980 was a place and setting in which I would have accepted the use of violence or not…..

But I know which I prefer greatly —- the use of non-violence.

And it dawned on me today

didn’t Kim Dae Jung fight hard for democracy in Korea for decades — effectively push the government (though ultimate success to a long time) —- without preaching the need for violent resistance or a violent defense against oppression?

That is praise worthy….

I’m not too sure at all the leaders in Kwangju 1980 deserve such praise or the same level of praise…..

RICHARDSON

No, sticking it to leftist students is not the only reason. ‘Kwangju Satae,’ has been used in the Western academic community for decades, and I seen no need to conform to South Korean revisionism, especially in the case of a mob mentality ‘incident’ now, in my opinion, inappropriately romanticized. If people get upset for having a spade called a spade, oh well.

As I said, I used that terminology in Kwangju with absolutely no problem. The only odd looks I got were a bit of astonishment from locals when I understood what they were talking about.



NoW for those who have no idea what happened that day may I please now direct you to this web site <a href="http://usinkorea.org/issues/kwangju/index.htm">HERE!</a>

Now lets talk about the USA-Korea military alliance. Short Version.

1. If South Korea is attacked by a foreign power, the USA will defend South Korea.

2. If it is an internal problem, then South Korea will deal with it in a manner that they seem fit.

To be honest, I have always felt that if South Korea wants to blame anyone for what happened in Kwangji, all they need to is to look in the mirror for the answer.

<a href="http://koreapopwars.blogspot.com/2007/07/gwangju-massacre-at-movies.html... pop war review</a> Mark has some great information about the movie and some interesting photos.

Now for the review.

I have to ask a question, if this incident is so important in Korean History, then why was it treated with too many fictional people and the main hero/villain was a person of fiction.

from <a href="http://www.hancinema.net/korean-movie-news_10073.php">csm</a>

In the film, the rebels, led by a fictitious former colonel, revel in defiance and mayhem. Troops fire point-blank into a boisterous crowd – minutes of carnage that didn't happen that way. "Too much dramatization", says Chi. The director, Kim Ji-hoon, he says, "may have overdone it".

Mr. Kim says the film shows the rebels "not as terrorists but as people who wanted to defend their country". Yes, they "were fiction", he says, "but I tried to venerate them so the 10 days of revolt were as close to the facts as possible".

The truth was terrible enough to deserve an accurate retelling, says Chi, sounding like critics of Oliver Stone's "Platoon", about Vietnam.

"The people of Kwangju will be embarrassed by so much divergence", he says. Other Koreans "will think it's what happened, and the younger generation may have a wrong understanding of history".
____________________________________________________________________________________


The film took the very simple approach that soldiers were evil killing machines and the people were just in the wrong place in the wrong time. For a film that claims to try and show all sides of this incident, to leave out the voices of the soldiers was a damn disgrace.

I was hopping that the film would at least attempt to be a t least a good piece of propaganda, it was not even that. The film was cut very badly and at times I had no idea why the next shot was even added, it was a mess to watch with no real timing and pace, it all seemed very rushed.

I have no idea why they insisted that it was 1980 but actor Lee Joon-ki looked like he had just left a 2007 Korean dance party. I never believed him in the high school student role.

Another major problem I had was the stupid love story between Min-wu (Kim Sang-kyeong) and female nurse Sin-ae (Lee Yo-won). Why do movies insist on calling it history but give us these stupid and tired love stories that take away from the historical importance OF the actual events as they went down?

The only good thing about the film was that the film did talk about the US, it did not blame the US for the incident happening.

To make a very long story short, the film ends with Min-wu and Sin-ae getting married, but its a wedding in Sin-ae mind. The wedding will never happen because he is dead and so is most of the wedding party. I could not believe that they ended the film like a modern Korean Music Video. What a huge waste of the crew, and the Director.

In trying to tell a story of a major event in Korean history, the director, Kim Ji-hoon, blows in and had the audience treating the actors who died as heroes and forgetting about the real cost of those days.

Please pass on this film at all cost.

Grade. F