Peter Hyams may have directed the great “Outland” but he also directed the laughable “Timecop” so I went into “A Sound Of Thunder” unsure of what to expect. This is a movie that looks so much like one made for television that you can hardly believe this got into theatres.

In “A Sound Of Thunder”, the year in 2055 and time travel has been invented and commercialised. Rich people pay to be transported back to the prehistoric era to gun down dinosaurs but on one of these expeditions, something goes horribly wrong and it causes a chain of events that alter evolution. Now a new reality is merging with our own as new horrifying creatures emerge and only some scientists can put things right.

The character in this movie are quite frankly awful. I did not care about any of the scientists at all. Ben Kingsley (“Gandhi”) plays a shameless businessman that is in charge of the company that offers the time travel expeditions. He is pretty good as the sort-of salesman that could sell sand to the Arabs. The monsters in this movie are hilariously bad and that is largely due to the low-budget special effects. The C.G.I. in this film is some of the worst I have ever seen so it is not surprising that you cannot take the monsters seriously.

The special effects are terrible, the characters are boring and the monsters are not remotely convincing. While some of the concepts are interesting, you realise how dumb this film really is when you actually think about the moment the characters choose to be sent back to in order to prevent the disaster. I will not spoil it but for anybody that has seen the movie, they must surely acknowledge that these scientists are not really very intelligent. “A Sound Of Thunder” might be good for a few laughs but that is about it.

“A Scanner Darkly” is based on short story by an author whose other tales have later become great movies such as “Blade Runner” and “Minority Report”. It is a weird movie with an interesting visual style as it was acted by real people but has an animated layer on top to create an almost-graphic novel effect.

In “A Scanner Darkly”, an undercover policeman codenamed ‘Fred’ (Keanu Reeves “The Matrix”, “Speed”) begins to lose his sanity, his perception of reality and his identity when investigating a new drug. It’s an interesting idea and the film has some good twists but unfortunately it feels so disjointed and just plain bizarre that ends up being more like “Heavy Metal” than “Total Recall” (another good film based on the same author’s short stories).

Keanu Reeves is good but the script doesn’t help him out as there are plenty of poor moments of dialog. His character has some real potential but never really reaches it. The characters that arguably ruin the film are the ones played by Robert Downey Jr. (“Iron Man”) and Woody Harrelson (“Zombieland”); they both play crazy drug-takers and they distract from the seriousness and grimness of the rest of the film by adding what seems to be a comedic edge but sadly they’re not even funny.

The biggest issue I had with this film is that it isn’t particularly clear about which side of the drug debate it is on because it shows the horrors of drug addiction but then makes those who try to stop drugs being brought into society like fascists. “A Scanner Darkly” has some intriguing ideas but it perhaps aims to be more artistic than it is capable of being; it’s making the fine arts speech without much knowledge on the subject so it of course improvises a lot of it.

“A Perfect World” is a mixed movie if you ask me. At times it feels like a goofy comedy done in the style of the “Dukes of Hazard” television series and “Smokey and the Bandit” but at other points the movie is awfully serious.

In “A Perfect World”, an escaped convict named Robert but nicknamed Butch (Kevin Costner “Dances With Wolves”, “Wyatt Earp”) is forced to kidnap an 8 year old boy named Phillip (T.J. Lowther). While a Texas Ranger named Red played by director and star Clint Eastwood (“Dirty Harry”) tracks him down, Phillip and his kidnapper bond.

The performances are quite good in “A Perfect World”. Costner is a fine actor and here he does a good job as Butch but it’s too bad the script keeps changing tone because he plays goofy and serious equally well. Clint Eastwood has limited screen-time and unlike a lot of his films he never fires a weapon in this picture. Eastwood is good but not great. Costner and Eastwood barely speak a few words to each other. The young boy is pretty good in my opinion. The other characters aren’t that great but none of them really have a lot of screen time.

The movie has a silly sequence involving a robbery and then it has a ton of harsh sequences including two where someone attempts rape (one involves a child). “A Perfect World” has some awkward scenes in it and I’m not sure what it is trying to say. Unlike Eastwood’s previous film “Unforgiven” where the idea was clearly about the effects of killing people, “A Perfect World” has hints of many things such as ‘anybody can be your father figure’, ‘a good person can do bad things’ and ‘you can’t just walk away from a crime’. It’s interesting but I didn’t feel satisfied with the movie.

“A Page Of Madness” is a silent Japanese film from 1926 that was thought to be lost for many years until a copy of it was found in the 1970s. I will not pretend to have understood what was going on but what it is clear is that this is a surreal experience with striking visuals. This is a very disturbing film, especially when you consider that it came out in 1920s.

Set in an insane asylum, a man takes a job as a caretaker as hopes to free his imprisoned wife from the institution. He also has to deal with the very frightening encounters with the other inmates, who are often very violent.

You really get the sense that the inmates in this picture are truly mad. You can see the insanity in their eyes and is very disturbing. They laugh like maniacs as the doctors and other asylum staff seek to restore order. The caretaker is also slowly but surely losing his mind as he begins to have aggressive and weird dreams. The performances in this movie are very good. There are no dialog intertitles so it is often very difficult to understand what is going on so that is why the physical performances of the actors and actresses matter even more.

Silent films can often be very inaccessible to modern audiences and “A Page Of Madness” is most certainly at the extreme end but it’s worth the effort. This is easily one of the best movies set in an insane asylum. In 1926, Japanese filmmakers were able to create something far more frightening and far more engaging than American movies such as “Gothika” over seven decades later. It’s also rather interesting to see what Japanese filmmakers were doing while Europeans were making “Metropolis” and “Battleship Potemkin” and Americans were making “The General” and “The Gold Rush”.

The supposed classic horror movie is not terrifying, not smart and not amusing; it is simply another dull slasher film. The film is responsible for introducing the world to Freddy Krueger, who is played by Robert Englund (everything else “Nightmare On Elm Street”). The film is also the most famous work of director Wes Craven (“Scream”), who needs to take some serious lessons from Alfred Hitchcock (“Psycho”), John Carpenter (“Halloween”) and Steven Spielberg (“Jaws”).

Deceased child murderer Freddy Krueger now spends his days invading the dreams of teenagers as he slices them up with his special glove with knives. When they wake up, their clothes are usually torn and they have cuts on them if they’re lucky enough to wake up at all. The overpowered menace seems incompetent though when he comes across Nancy (Heather Langenkamp).

Freddy Krueger takes a pounding both physically and verbally at the end of this movie, showing us just how pathetic he really is. He is potentially an interesting character but the film never offers us all that much. He also takes the unoriginal route of killing teenagers that are off having intercourse. Heather Langenkamp might be a good actress but this film doesn’t really help her career as she has weak lines. This film is noted for featuring a young Johnny Depp (“Ed Wood”) so fans of him may want to check this out.

“A Nightmare On Elm Street” has a few good set-ups but instead of growing some brains, it decides to be dull and play it safe. Safe because for some reason, lots of people love movies where dumb teens are mindlessly and brutally slaughtered. I myself thought and hoped I’d be seeing something half-decent here as it did spawn several sequels but it is a mediocre film. Then again, it is pretty darn good compared to lots of slasher films (“Halloween: Resurrection” I’m looking at you).

“A Nightmare On Elm Street 3: The Dream Warriors”, I like to think the title is so long because people are forced to have a lengthy conversation about it just by merely saying its name. In some ways, this is a step up from the previous two, if it weren’t for the fact it feels incredibly tired.

Yes, Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund “A Nightmare On Elm Street”) is back in “The Dream Warriors and the girl Nancy, who was played by Heather Langenkamp as she reprises her role too in the first film also returns, this time it is to help a bunch of teens that are suffering from the boring killer’s new reign of terror in ‘Slumber Land’.

Freddy is given a few more comedic lines but they still aren’t enough to salvage him from being a dull villain. I should have always been terrified of him or laughing with him but instead I groan at him and this being the third outing, you think they would have got it right by now. Fans may be intrigued by the new background given on Freddy. Nancy is as uninteresting as she was in the first film. For all those who love these movies, they’ll be happy to know there are plenty more bland teens to be sliced and diced.

The death scenes and dreams/nightmares in general are more elaborate than before but there was at least some energy I felt with the first two films that is absent from this one. It feels like simply an excuse to kill off a bunch of teens. I’m still waiting for someone to make the character of Freddy funnier or scarier and I’m still waiting for someone to take this series to make a movie that keeps my attention. All I can say is blood and special effects can’t help a movie that is this hollow.

“A Nightmare On Elm Street 2” subtitled “Freddy’s Revenge” is not much better and not much worse than the original film and that’s because it just isn’t very scary or particularly fun. This one is unsure of itself as at times it feels like a satire and then contradicts itself by having long sections that seem like the genuine article. For the bad wrap this one has received, I can at least defend it by saying it is no weaker than its predecessor.

In “Freddy’s Revenge”, child killer Freddy Krueger (Robert Englund “A Nightmare On Elm Street”) is back haunting the dreams of sexuality-confused teen Jesse (Mark Patton), who has just moved into the very house Freddy terrorised last time (this is a boring cliché in horror films). Jesse finds that Mr. Krueger is using him to commit several more grizzly and generally dull murders.

Mark Patton actually seems okay as Jesse but the script doesn’t help him out at all. Freddy is a little more comedic this time around and that definitely works in his favour. I like the incredibly small role Robert Englund has without the make-up as the bus driver. The other characters are dumb as hell seen as how this is another dud teen slasher movie so don’t be expecting anything smart coming from them.

“Freddy’s Revenge” has an entertaining opening scene and it is straight-downhill from there on. The “Nightmare On Elm Street” films are better than lots of teen slasher pictures in the sense that the villain actually has some personality, despite it not being pushed to its full potential. If you’re here for Freddy and the blood and guts then you’ll enjoy this film. One thing I also disliked was the overly sexual nature of the film, not only does it have loads of intercourse-craving teens like most slasher movies but it features numerous and unnecessary shots of male rears and numerous and unnecessary homosexual references that add nothing to the film whatsoever.

From Seth MacFarlane, the creator of “Ted” and tv’s “Family Guy”, comes the abysmal “A Million Ways To Die In The West”. This is a Western comedy but instead of ridiculing the genre, it just adds a lot of bodily fluids. It’s lazy, it’s tedious and the dialog is some of the worst I have ever heard in any movie.

Set in 1882, unhappy sheep farmer Albert (MacFarlane) is struggling to cope with breaking up with his girlfriend (Amanda Seyfried “Mean Girls”) and the barbarity of his surroundings. He eventually falls for Anna (Charlize Theron “The Devil’s Advocate”, “Atomic Blonde”) but little does he know that she is the wife of feared gunslinger Clinch Leatherwood (Liam Neeson “Schindler’s List”, “Michael Collins”).

MacFarlane is just absolutely awful. He never says anything funny but his mouth never stops moving. Liam Neeson is okay as the villain. I did not really care for Charlize Theron or Amanda Seyfried. Neil Patrick Harris (“Starship Troopers”), Sarah Silverman (“Wreck-It Ralph”), Ewan McGregor (“Trainspotting”), Christopher Lloyd (“Back To The Future”) and Jamie Foxx (“Django Unchained”) all appear and none of them are amusing. The Silverman character is particularly tiresome as she is a prostitute that has not slept with her boyfriend and the gags about her being covered in a certain substance get old really fast.

“A Million Ways To Die In The West” is painfully unfunny with its poor use of the Western setting, the gross gags and MacFarlane’s self-indulgent script. This is even worse than “Family Guy” and “Ted” and it is so long. If you are a big fan of MacFarlane and his shtick then maybe you will enjoy this film. I just find MacFarlane’ style to be really irritating and it seems like he has way too much creative control with nobody around him telling him how lacklustre a lot of his material is.

“A Liar’s Autobiography” is a fully animated entry into the “Monty Python” franchise but it’s disappointing. It’s meant to be a parody of the life of Monty Python member Graham Chapman (“The Life of Brian”) but instead of being funny, it’s merely lots of weird sexual content.

Graham Chapman is to this day, the only member of the group to have died. This film doesn’t claim to tell a factual story about him but it doesn’t even show us an interesting one. Most of the film focuses on his sexual experimentations with men, homosexuality isn’t a punch-line and I’d have thought the geniuses behind the tv series of “Monty Python” and the other films would have known that as they worked on this.

Graham Chapman’s voice is used to narrate this picture but it doesn’t help anything. John Cleese (“Clockwise”), Michael Palin (“Jabberwocky”) and the rest are all here to lend their voices but who cares, they aren’t saying anything funny. These are the masters that gave us a sketch about dead parrots and cheese shops that kept us laughing throughout, what has happened here. Stephen Fry (“Tooth”) and Cameron Diaz (“Charlie’s Angels”) also provide their voices but it doesn’t add anything to the experience.

At this point, the review seems merely compiled of degrading comments so why did it receive its rating; well I’ll admit that I love the animation. We see nearly every type of animation you could possibly think of and the film becomes a real treat to the eyes, it’s a pity that most of the time the screen is littered with cartoon genitals and not something more sophisticated. Take away the animation and this film is pathetic, it’s not funny and it’s not clever. Some may claim it’s insensitive to talk the way they do about a deceased person here and use footage of him but I believe Chapman would have loved a mockery of his life to be made; he would have been offended by the low quality of this particular mockery.

“A Good Day To Die Hard” is the abysmal fifth and hopefully last entry in the once amazing “Die Hard” franchise. I can’t believe the original was such a perfect example of how to make an action picture and now we have degenerated to this point. Even the weak “Die Hard 4.0” is better than this.

In “A Good Day To Die Hard”, John McClane (Bruce Willis “Die Hard”, “The Kid”) travels to Russia in order to try and mend his relationship with his son Jack (Jai Courtney “Jack Reacher”) but then terrorists strike and John discovers his son is actually spy for the C.I.A. and after the operation goes haywire the two McClanes are the only guys left to save the day. What we get is an endless amount of dull and moronic action scenes that are about as close to reality as a Bugs Bunny cartoon.

The great joy of the earlier films (the first three I’d say) was that John McClane hated being dragged into these situations and he couldn’t believe one guy had to fight off so much stuff but this time he doesn’t even care. The character knows he is a good guy in an action film and thus he knows he can jump out of windows and smash through glass left right and centre. I really disliked the Jack character. The villains were unmemorable.

The film is a total mess from start to finish. It would work had it been a spoof because the action is so ridiculous it actually goes beyond anything I’ve seen in action film spoofs such as “Last Action Hero”. Most films don’t have the budget to be this dumb; it is a real shame because if you watch the original you’ll see smart action where the hero had to think of a plausible way to escape death and he could be seriously hurt but here the characters dive through glass and get bits of shrapnel in them and it never causes them much trouble.