Skyscraper (2018)

So a couple weeks ago, I decided to go see three films across three days. I have a Cineworld unlimited card, why not? Anyway, on the Saturday I saw 'Incredibles 2', it was a great film, probably prefer the first one but that's not to say the sequel wasn't good, it's a great film. On the Monday, because the car park at home was being repainted, I went to see 'The Secret of Marrowbone'. It was alright, early on it generated a great atmosphere but lost it towards the end, but it was still pretty good. In between them on the Sunday I saw 'Skyscraper'. It was stupid.

Oh, yes, the film which started off looking like a reimagining of 'The Towering Inferno', tried to reimagine 'Die Hard', and in the end had no idea which film it was supposed to be, turned out to be a bit of a mess. Most of the things I want to comment on are spoilers so there'll be a spoiler section.

In 'Skyscraper' we find Will Sawyer (Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson), a former FBI hostage rescue team leader but now runs safety checks on buildings from his garage, (at one point they list a whole bunch of stuff off his resume which really makes his career path strange) is tasked by his former colleague Ben (Pablo Schreiber) to assess the world's newest largest building in the world, The Pearl, owned by Zhao Long Ji (Chin Han). However evil terrorists, led by Kores Botha (Roland Moller), threaten to burn down the building and steal something from Zhao. However, Sawyer's wife, Sarah (Neve Campbell), and their kids, are trapped in the building, so Will goes in to save his family.

Now, one of the main problems with this, is The Rock. Yeah, the character's name is Will Sawyer, but let's face it, it's The Rock. Now there's nothing wrong with The Rock, his acting is great, he's probably the best thing in this film. But, the main thing I like to see in a film is the hero facing a challenge. Having the Rock as an amputee helps, but when he climbs a crane at least 97 stories high (the fire is started on the 95/96th floor, details are a bit hazy after two weeks, and the fire has to go up the building) and suffers zero fatigue, as well as pull off so many other implausible stunts, the idea of him being vulnerable is...thrown out the window of the world's largest building. How can we expect The Rock to be in certain danger when he seems invulnerable.

Yeah sure, we've had the same thing in the past, Superman for one, though I've never been a big Superman fan.  There's James Bond, he's saved the world God knows how many times, but he's the best of the best of British Intelligence, he's had years of training. John McClane in the Die Hard films, he's a detective but in the first film they had him run across broken glass and then have to pull out the shards of glass of his feet. The Power Rangers reboot, they had Rita Repulsa beat the hell out of the Rangers before the climatic battle. It's better to see the character or characters vulnerable or fail before they overcome their challenge/s. Not overcome them no matter what from the outset.

Now the other characters....hmm. The only really fleshed out character is Sarah, The Rock's wife, played by Neve Campbell. Sarah, to be fair, isn't the stereotypical damsel in distress, in fact she takes it on herself to do....some things, and Campbell does a good job. Their kids, played by McKenna Roberts and Noah Cottrell,....are there. As someone who did a "most annoying child actors" list they did fine, but they only serve as a rescue plot device.

Then we have our main villain Kores Botha, where again, Roland Møller did a good job. Or at least I've seen worse. The thing with Botha is that he and Zhao have a history and Botha wanted the building to burn down whilst Zhao watched helplessly, whilst stealing from him. The problem is that...why couldn't he have set the building on fire AFTER stealing from him? Wouldn't that have made EVERYTHING easier? There'd be no police presence, no Rock in the building, and you'd be on the way to freedom. Believe me, I'll be coming back to this in the spoiler section.

Supporting cast include Noah Taylor as Mr. Pierce, Hannah Quinlivan as the assassin Xia...I think, I don't think her name was ever mentioned, or at least it's stated only once and never again, Byron Mann as Inspector Wu, and Adrian Holmes as Ajani Okeke. Again, they were alright. Taylor was probably the worse, but they did alright. Although Xia...now that I think about it, I don't think has any lines. She must have had one or two, but most of the time she just does a sexy evil glare towards the camera.

So, overall, the acting isn't the problem, it's how the characters are written. It's the same cliches from 80s and 90s action flicks. Even Mann and another detective, I'm pretty sure it's Elfina Luk as Inspector Han, are the "I'll be the one who wants the whole story while you be the one who automatically assumes The Rock is the bad guy" couple. Taylor is the stereotypical British guy in an American film (again, I'll mention this in the spoilers), in fact, apart from The Rock, and probably Schreiber and Han, we don't actually deal with any other character long enough to develop them. When we're introduced to Pierce and Okeke, Pierce has one line basically saying hi and Okeke says nothing. To be fair, I loved Adrian Holmes, he was great.

The effects, can be hit and miss. The explosions are cool, and who doesn't love explosions, the hollodeck in The Pearl looks stunning, and the views to the ground actually managed to set off my vertigo, but other things like the crane swinging or bridges falling down just don't look good.


So, admittedly looking through that it sounds like I'm overall praising the film doesn't it? Well, to be fair, it isn't that bad. The acting is pretty good, especially from the Rock, but the story is a mess and predictable, the characters are weak, and it adds nothing new to what we've seen a hundred times. That's not to say it's a bad movie, it's okay at best, it's good to have on in the background, but it's a stupid film which has been much better elsewhere. In fact, go watch 'The Towering Inferno' and/or 'Die Hard'.

Now the spoiler section



Spoiler Section

Firstly, when I mentioned when Pierce and Okeke are introduced one is a British guy saying one line and the other saying nothing? Well, it's at this point where I though that the terrorists couldn't pull this off without someone on the inside. Now, who will it be? The British guy or the guy who didn't say anything? Not even sure if it's a spoiler, it's so blatantly obvious.

But it's not just that, they have TWO people on the inside, the British guy, and Ben. Ben was involved in the same incident that took Rock's leg, but left him with a scarred face. This has resulted in Ben being in pain and...somehow in debt with the terrorists. Obviously, the Rock is surely also in pain, he lost part of his leg, but Ben works at one of the most technologically advanced buildings, if not THE most technologically advanced buildings, in the world, how can he be in debt? We are never told why, it's just passed over with Ben saying how Rock got a hot wife and family and Ben got nothing, but that's it. The Rock was working in his garage, surely Ben earned more in a week than the Rock did in a year.

Oh but wait, the biggest stupid thing is yet to come.

At the start of the film, The Rock is given a tablet that biometrically scans his face so only the Rock can use it. Ben orchestrates a mugging of Rock's bag, but it turns out the Rock put the tablet in his jacket pocket and not the bag. So the terrorists, after Ben dies at the Rock's hands, send Xia and a squad to get the tablet. They get the tablet, and then force the Rock to unlock the tablet. What this means is that when they thought they originally had it, they still needed the Rock's face to unlock it! What was the point in stealing it earlier if you still needed his face to unlock the damn thing?!

Now later in the film, the bad guys have the Rock and his daughter (Campbell and his son have escaped). The terrorists want the Rock to open a panic room where Zhao is, because Pierce told them that Rock is capable of opening the door. Why Pierce, one of Zhao's right hand men, isn't capable of this, who the fuck knows. Anyway, Rock tells them that the only way to open the door is either inside, or the anti-fire systems on the floor are activated. Well, then that's fine, the bad guys control the systems...
Botha: You're going to open the door
Me: Uh, what?
Botha: Or else we're going to throw your daughter off the roof
Me: But...but you can just turn on the anti-fire systems to open the door. You control the system!

Yeah! Seriously, the bad guys make the Rock go on a stupid Spider-man climb round the side of the building to a wind turbine to open the door, when all they had to do, was activate the anti-fire systems. The terrorists don't need the Rock! They can just kill him! What, are they worried about the fire not destroying the building they're in? Well, maybe they could have waited until they stole this device they wanted, and THEN set the building on fire!

Now, the reason why they don't just enable the anti-fire, I believe it's because the locked the system down. After unlocking the tablet Xia and her squad go to an off site facility which runs the system for the Pearl. Here, Xia and her squad kill the people there and use a hacker to get into the system to turn off the anti-fire mechanics. After the hacker does this, he enables the tablet for all users, then I believe he says that he put his algorithm into the system so only he can access, he is then shot by Xia. The thing here is, if he was going to enable it so no-one can access the system, why did he enable the tablet to be accessible by ALL USERS?!

Oh! It's because Neve Campbell can't access the tablet otherwise! But wait, that hacker's algorithm means she can't turn the system on, oh well, I guess Rock and daughter are dead. Oh who am I kidding, she saves the day. And how does she do it? Well, imagine the stupidest thing you can do with a computer system that won't work properly SHE TURNS IT OFF AND ON AGAIN.

Are you serious?! This hacker's algorithm, this thing that was supposed to stop people accessing the system, prevent people from turning on the anti-fire systems, was fixed by turning it off and on again?! What the fucking hell?! It's stupid! The film's stupid! Stop being stupid movie! It's not even like the terrorists couldn't figure it out, the instruction came up in English! So they could have just turn the system off and on again, turned on the anti fire systems, open the door, and get Zhao! It's infuriatingly stupid!

Most of the film I could forgive, but this turn it off and on again bit, God!

Trailer Talks: Ghostbusters (2016)

Hey guys! I'm back at the posts! I know I haven't done a post in AGES and I have a tremendous amount of backlog so at this point I might as well wipe the slate clean. Random reviews I will hopefully still get around to but...*clears throat* "new" releases will be scraped. Whether I do these reviews, I doubt it, but won't say I won't.

Now, I'm sure everyone has heard about it by now, but there's a new Ghostbusters on the way, and the trailer came out earlier this week.

Normally I don't really think so much of a trailer, but this one is...it's just so...talkative?

Now, before anyone says anything, no I don't have a problem with an all female cast. Saying that, I would have prefer a mixed gender team, like Extreme Ghostbusters did almost twenty years ago. But I don't have a problem with a team that only allows one gender. What I do have a problem is that if anyone has a problem with Paul Feig's Ghostbusters, they're automatically accused of being sexist. People have bad things to say because the new Ghostbusters looks shit. Got it?

Now I will start this by saying that I didn't hate the trailer...as much as I thought I would. But all the problems I thought it would have are there. Firstly, the cast. Kristen Wiig is her ususal comedic self and Melissa McCarthy is her usual uncomedic self. Yeah, I am not a big McCarthy fan. She generally tends to play the same lovable, clumsy but vulgar character who everyone loves in the end. Granted we don't see THAT character in the trailer except for that clumsy persona.

But my main talking points are on Kate McKinnon and Leslie Jones' characters. Firstly, Jones' character Patty, who is only there because, unlike the other people who live in New York, she knows where things are in New York. They have gone down the stereotypical black person route, which is extremely evident in the part of the trailer where McCarthy's character is possessed and Patty exorcises the ghost by bitchslapping McCarthy. I am fucking serious.

You may remember in the original 1984 film Sigourney Weaver's character is possessed by Zuul. Apparently all Billy Murray's Venkman had to do was punch her in the face, can you imagine? It's almost like saying Patty's role is bigger than Winston Zeddmore's and in reality she could be replaced by a bloody sat-nav. Then again a sat-nav wouldn't have been able to do a Southern Baptist impression.

Now McKinnon's character, which is so obviously a rip off of Venkman. The only real difference (apart from being female of course) is that she comes off a bit more...punkier? Either way, she's the Venkman knock off. That's really my only problem with her, but if you're going to do a remake (or reboot, whatever term the kids want to use these days), how about you make the film your own and not rip off the original? There is a returning character though, Slimer, who does look good.

Speaking of the original, it would appear the first ghost the team comes across is the Librarian. And in all fairness, the 2016 Librarian does actually look pretty cool, with the glow and the design, it actually looks pretty scary

until it starts throwing up

and then it looks fucking stupid.

It's really quite amazing how hope is raised here, and then it is quickly dashed. It is the sign where the seriousness of the Ghostbusters franchise is gone and becomes the vulgar and crude Paul Feig comedy which only teenagers should find funny. Which, in relation to my earlier "make it your own film" comment, well, congratulations you made it your own subpar comedy. I'm calling it now, the new film will have a scene where the characters are scared of a spider.

Of course, the original films had its own case of silly looking ghosts, demons, and/or Gods. Like we had;

      um...a dragon?                                                                                              Godzilla?            










     and...whatever this is

But when you have ghost which looks like a weirder thing to see walking around New York than the Stay Puft marshmallow man, you have a problem

Oh, and as you probably heard from the trailer, someone is apparently behind the supernatural phenomena. So it will most likely be Wiig's love interest. Maybe McCarthy's. Also, just want to quickly point out, Kristen Wiig is really the only cast member who can pull off the scientist character to me. McKinnon I've never seen in action before, that's why my only problem is the Venkman rip off, I've no idea how funny she can be. Though if the best she can do is put on a silly wig and hat...admittedly that brought a smile so it may be good. McCarthy though I can't take seriously as a scientist. It's like how they made out to be a superspy in 'Spy', I just can't believe it. Admittedly this is most likely because I absolutely hate Melissa McCarthy.

We also get a glance of the gadgets used in the new film, and like the ghosts, it starts off with a cool factor, before immediately going "what the fuck?". The good bit, are the pistols (I assume we'll just call them proton pistols), which McKinnon's character has to emphasize by licking one of the pistols...which, if they are the same machinery as the proton packs, is actually really stupid to do since they will be radioactive. Also, since we see these pistols don't have a power source like the proton packs, then presumably these will run out of power quickly, or there's no need to carry around the heavy proton packs anymore, unless they charge in the proton packs...I've just written myself out of liking the proton pistols.

Alright, the other gadgets...McCarthy has a proton knuckle duster. I...I can't even...who the hell came up with this?! Who the hell thought "we need McCarthy to punch a ghost in the face to be funny"? Obviously this is supposed to be a joke because no-one would take punching a ghost with a special knuckle duster seriously. Yes, I know this is about women taking on ghosts.

And yet, the proton knuckle duster is NOT the stupidest look gadget in the film. That belongs to the ghost bear trap. I am serious. They develop a bear trap for ghosts. This, I can only assume, is a prototype and nothing more. Firstly, how the hell are they going to carry that thing?! Look at it! It's bigger than their bodies! Secondly, how is it meant to trap ghosts? I'm sure they'll explain/show in the actual film, but for now it looks like the ghost can get through that big gap you see when the trap is closed.

Let's go back to the original films and look at the simple yet effective ghost traps, They look like they can actually trap something, and as shown in the 1984 film, also allows a simple method to put the ghosts in the containment unit, and is easy to carry around.The bear trap looks heavy, complicated, and stupid. It's a clear sign they're going flashy with the gadgets instead of actually thinking about the design.

And that's really all I can say from the trailer. It was more miss than hit for me, and definitely confirms what I was worried about; that they are only doing this for a quick buck, with no thought about the originals and what made the originals so great. Obviously we will need to wait and see what the whole product delivers but right now, it's not good.

Thanks for reading guys, obviously it's something different to what I have posted in the past and I may do more 'Trailer Talks', improving it here and there...and may come up with a different name, who knows. I am sort of thinking of doing one for 'Batman vs Superman', maybe as a way to help get me back into posting regularly.

WrestleMania 31 Predicitions

It's that time of year folks, it is time for WrestleMania! The Show of Shows is once again upon us...and there are some...questionable decisions in the last few months. Particularly at the Royal Rumble. Now, I was one of those pissed off with Roman Reigns winning it, but not because he won it. I was pissed off because of how the WWE did it; by having Kane and Big Show literally dump all the other popular superstars out of the ring (I didn't really mind about Daniel Bryan's early appearance and elimination). However Reigns showed at Fastlane with his match with Daniel Bryan that he can pull off a good match. Let's just hope he can do it again.



Pre-Show: WWE Tag Team Championship Fatal 4 Way

What could have been a potential show stealer (despite featuring the bland Usos, the forgettable Los Matadores, and the even blander New Day) has been kicked to the pre show. Personally I feel its too soon for Kidd and Cesaro to drop the titles. The Usos at the Hall of Fame were said to have dominated the tag team division, but that's only because the rest of the division was weak, and has been for a long long time. The tag team division has one dominant team for a while with them winning the titles, before losing them to another upcoming team, rinse and repeat. The Ascension should have been in this match so that they can put on a good showing, not win the titles, but put on a good showing. Anyway, Kidd and Cesaro to win.

Pre-Show: The Andre the Giant Battle Royal Memorial

Wow, half the roster put on the pre-show. There isn't really a way to accurately predict this, especially since I don't really know who is in it. There's Ryback, Curtis Axel, Damian Mizdow, The Miz, Adam Rose, Erick Rowen, and loads of other people. So I'll do what I did last year and name three candidates. I will go with Damien Mizdow (hopefully dropping the Miz gimmick), NXT's Hideo Itami, and Curtis Axel. I'm one of the #AxelMania people! I actually think he has a chance in this!

AJ Lee & Paige vs The Bella Twins

It's quite amazing how fast the Bella's went downhill after their feud. Seriously Brie's mic skills improved, Nikki's wrestling skill improved, now that they're on the same page again they've gone back down to the same subpar stuff they do. Even the Give Divas a chance hashtag didn't help. AJ Lee and Paige always seem to have that great "frenemy" chemistry, and I definitely prefer them to the Bella's, so I certainly hope they win.

Rusev vs John Cena - United States Championship

It really is weird seeing John Cena fighting for a title that isn't the WWE Title. Even more bizarre is that I saw that Cena gave an interview on WWE.Com that this "might" be his last WrestleMania. Which I seriously doubt. This is kind of tricky, I don't see Cena winning a title that isn't the WWE title (I know he won the Tag Team titles every so often...for about five minutes) but it would destroy Rusev's credibility if he lost...just like John Cena did to Vladimir Kozlov and Umanga, the latter ending up losing to Santino Marella, and the former teaming up with Santino Marella. Personally, I want Rusev to win, by any means. But, I have a feeling Cena will pull out the victory, kind of because this match/result has been building up since Rusev's debut.

7-man Intercontinental Title Ladder match

Do you know the best way to restore a belt's prestige? Have a random number of superstars steal the belt from the rightful owner. Following the shameful result of Bad News Barrett's match against Dean Ambrose, the title has now changed more hands the last month than the Hardcore title when that was around, and yet Barrett hasn't actually lost the championship, he's still the champion. Anyway, with the tag team title match on the pre-show, this might now pip the night as a show stealer, mainly because this is unpredictable and ladder matches always add a bit of excitement. It's almost like a money in the bank match. With R-Truth bizarrely on a WrestleMania card, Stardust completely ignoring his rivalry with Goldust, Daniel Bryan losing out on the main event, and Luke Harper and Dolph Ziggler thrown in for some reason, this could be one hell of a match. Since he should have won the title at Fastlane to get a jumpstart on his career, I'm going to say Dean Ambrose will win.

Randy Orton vs Seth Rollins

Apparently Randy Orton has mentioned that this could steal the show, and who knows, maybe it will. But I am actually expecting a dirty end to this match, a DQ or something...although this is WrestleMania and that shouldn't occur on this show. Despite a pretty week story going into this (seriously Seth, you really believed Orton forgave you for putting him "out of action"?), this is actually a match that I'm looking forward to. Rollins is a tremendous athlete, I love watching him in action, and Randy Orton can pull off some great matches as well. Personally I hope Seth Rollins will win.

Undertaker vs Bray Wyatt

Undertaker will win. I know that was what I said last year and Brock Lesnar won. I'm still undecided as to whether they meant it or it was botched. Although I'm pretty sure they meant it, because of how Michael Cole said "it's over" when Lesnar got the three count. This year, I very much doubt Undertaker will lose twice in a row, even if it's to make Bray Wyatt "the new face of fear"...I need to get the t-shirt. The question is "why are they doing this match?". Undertaker's undefeated streak is over, the magic is gone. Death, taxes, and the streak were meant to be the only things in life, now the whole point of Undertaker's annual match is gone, the only thing I can think of is that it's to pass the torch to Wyatt, but if they wanted to do that then they shouldn't have had the Undertaker lose last year. Sigh, Undertaker to win.

Sting vs Triple H

He's here. The Icon, the Vigilante, Sting, is finally going to wrestle in the WWE, and what a first opponent in the Cerebral Assassin, the Game, Triple H. I have never seen Sting wrestle. Apart from the couple of minutes he and Triple H brawl anyway. I probably should since I have the WWE Network, look at his old WCW stuff. But I'm expecting Sting to win his debut here, I just hope it isn't like that disappointing Mr McMahon vs Bret Hart match a few years ago.

Brock Lesnar vs Roman Reigns - WWE World Heavyweight Championship

I have never seen Brock Lesnar become a face so quick and with him not doing anything. Okay, maybe not a face, just the one most people want to win. Following Reigns' controversial Royal Rumble win, the pressure has been on him to deliver in the ring and on the mic. The mic, not so much, but his match at Fastlane was a great match. And then they amplified the feud between these two...by having them play a game of tug of war with the WWE Title. That was a stupid idea. With Lesnar signing a new deal with the WWE, the outcome of this match has suddenly been thrown up in the air. However I am expecting Reigns to win the match, but neither men will walk out of WrestleMania with the title. I am expecting Seth Rollins to cash in, I mean, that can be the only reason why he hasn't cashed in yet right? Right? Anyway, Roman Reigns to win the battle, Seth Rollins to win the war.

And those are my predictions for tonight's WrestleMania, I hope it's a good one.

Return to House on Haunted Hill (2007)

My first video review has arrived, and I've finally ventured back into the House on haunted hill.

Although, as it turns out, there's another evil force lurking about.

And yes, while I say "happy new year" in the video, I am well aware it is a bit late for that.

Anyways, here's the link.

Exodus: Gods and Kings (2014)

Well, it is Christmas time so I guess bringing out a film based on a tale from the Bible is the right thing to do. And after we followed the story of the Ark earlier this year, we now follow Moses and the Hebrews...in a film where virtually no-one is of the same ethnicity of the characters they're playing. Yeah the whole, "whitewashing" thing. In all honesty, it doesn't really bother me, but that's mainly because I'm used to it. Jake Gyllenhaal in 'Prince of Persia', Gerard Butler in '300', Sean Connery in 'Highlander' where, instead of playing a Scottish block, he's playing an Egyptian. I don't think it's right, don't get me wrong.

Ridley Scott said that the film basically wouldn't have been made because it wouldn't have been financed. No-one would have financed a film starring some unknown. Which fair enough, one or two (or three) big names to grab peoples attention. Though when he was quoted as saying "I can't mount a film of this budget...and say that my lead actor is Mohammad so-and-so from such-and-such" it sounds like he didn't even bother looking in the first place. I mean, Idris Elba? Chiwetel Ejiofor? I can actually see Chiwetel Ejiofor doing a great job as Ramesses II.

Anyway. Course if you want a more...in depth look into the race issue, you can look at this.

So here, we follow a prince called Moses (Christian Bale) and his adoptive brother Ramesses (Joel Edgerton...who, I'm sorry, but looks really...really...hmm...I'm gonna go with plastic). Moses finds the treatment of the Hebrew slaves deplorable, but soon finds himself exiled when it is discovered he's of Hebrew descent. Moses however returns after meeting God (Isaac Andrews, and I actually don't agree with the idea that God is represented by a child) in order to free his people.

There may or may not be spoilers. It's kind of hard to know what to say about a story that's literally as old as the Bible. Because it's in the Bible.

I might as well get the acting out of the way. It's...good I suppose.  I didn't really...I'm actually finding it hard to think of anything to say about this. It just felt like the characters were plodding along, I didn't feel any emotion from them. Sigourney Weaver, Ben Kingsley, um...I'm sure other people were in it, they weren't in it long enough for me to care. Bale is the focus point, but I can't really see any difference between his performance in this and 'The Dark Knight' series.

I suppose it's more how the characters are written. And how the plot was written. You see, Ridley Scott (the director in case you didn't know) decided to look for scientific methods for the plagues and God and the Parting of the Red Sea. Now, this actually bothered me more than I thought it would. That and Bale saying that Moses was "schizophrenic" and "barbaric". I can see why, the whole "there's a scientific explanation for everything" thing. But...why?

That's the thing I don't get by trying to explain everything as science...in a bible story. You're supposed to be telling a story about God, not trying to debunk it. The film even has a scientist character who explains to Ramesses/the audience why science can be used here, which really doesn't work since the Ancient Egyptians were a pretty religious race. Oh yeah, they had great scientific advances like paper (papyrus), irrigation system, medical procedures, heck, their building methods were very advanced. But do you know how many deities they had? Anubis, Seth (or Set), Osiris, Horus, Sekhmet, Ra, Amun, Sobek, Isis, and Thoth...and those are just the common ones you hear about. Heck, some combine! Like Amun-Ra!

And then, of course, there's God, who the film is portraying as a possible hallucination. One of the most famous stories from the bible, and you're saying it was some madman's fantasy. And yet, after saying that most (if not all) of the plagues were a multipler effect caused by...well, the first plague (which actually seems more implausible than a supernatural force being behind it), and yet the likelihood of all these things, as well as an unexplained plague of darkness, and a tidal wave, all happening around the same time, it's just too much of a coincidence. Then, with the scientific method, God's plagues are also targeting the Hebrews, which makes sense in a realistic world, but not when God is suppose to be using Moses to free the Hebrews because they're suffering. That's when you have to wonder if Scott is going down the scientific route or the religious route. Though I'm sure Scott intentionally left that open for the audience to decide for themselves.

As mentioned earlier there's also the way how the characters are portrayed. I've mentioned God was portrayed as a kid earlier, and I don't agree with that, basically because God then comes off as a child having a tantrum (which, in one scene, he actually does), as well as irritating rather than all-powerful. Like 'The Prince of Egypt', 'Exodus' should have focused on the relationship between Moses and Ramesses, that's what made 'The Prince of Egypt' successful; we get to see the human side of Ramesses a lot more clearly. However in 'Exodus' Ramesses, and his relationship with Moses, feels underdeveloped so we don't care about it.

Moses meanwhile, I can certainly see why Bale called him a barbarian. He kills four people for vaguely defined reasons while not giving a single care in the world, and terrorises a city. And that's BEFORE the plagues arrive. In fact, because of one scene involving Ramesses after a certain plague, I sympathise more with him than I do Moses. With Moses, the lines between freedom fighter and terrorist definitely get muddled.

Other characters are virtually footnotes and not really worth talking about. So, actually it shouldn't really matter that the characters are portrayed by white people because they barely register as characters and more like furniture. Sigourney Weaver, drastically underused. I actually keep forgetting Ben Kingsley is in this. In fact, with the exception of Moses and Ramesses, you will forget everybody's names. That is a promise. There is one scene where Moses and Ramesses are talking, then three other characters come in, you have no idea who they are, their roles are mentioned once, and then are never seen again.

So on top of all that, you'd never guess the story feels lacking. Seriously there's a huge battle in the first ten minutes that was so boring. I haven't felt this bored watching action scenes since the last Resident Evil film. Then this film jumps around the place, making this film feel rushed, despite being over two hours. And then, along with the "trying to find scientific reasons" thing, this film feels quite modern at times. This includes Ramesses saying he won't free the slaves because it's economically impossible. Then again, the film also has horse mounted archers...four hundred years early. But there are some fantastic shots of the scenery and the plagues.

So yeah, if you want to see a film which has spectacular imagery and/or you're a big Ridley Scott fan, then this is your film. But, for the most part, it's just underwhelming, and that's the biggest shame about this film. Oh it probably still would have been bad, but it would have been enjoyable at least. Everything feels lacking, from the acting to the action to the story, so it feels like a chore just to get invested in the film. Just, just stick to watching 'The Prince of Egypt'.