“Godzilla: King of the Monsters” is the first American “Godzilla” film that I actually enjoyed. The 1998 one had a monster that was nothing like Godzilla and the 2014 did not show us enough monster action. This is a sequel to the 2014 film and the filmmakers seem to have got the message that we want more monsters but they still have not worked out how to shoot the fight scenes.

A group of environmental terrorists decide to use a special device to awaken the giant monsters of the world. Godzilla, Mothra, Rodan and King Ghidorah will have to battle it out to claim the throne. Meanwhile, the secretive Monarch organisation seeks to try and save humanity from the threat of the monsters.

I’m still not overly pleased with the design of Godzilla. He looked great in some of the Japanese films from the 90s and 2000s so why not just copy that design? King Ghidorah is my favourite monster from the franchise and he looks great here. Mothra and Rodan look okay. Some of the other monsters that they briefly show look rather disappointing. Kyle Chandler (“Argo”), Ken Watanabe (“The Last Samurai”) and Charles Dance (“Last Action Hero”) give good performances but pretty much everybody else was underwhelming and some were even irritating.

“Godzilla: King of the Monsters” could have been terrific because has a lot of fancy effects and lots of destruction. However, we still spend far too much time with the humans and the fight sequences could have been a lot better. It’s particularly frustrating considering this takes place in the same universe as “Kong: Skull Island”, which got the fights spot on. I do like the fact that they throw in lots of references to the earlier Japanese movies and I cannot deny that this is probably much more accessible for non-fans than almost all of the Japanese movies. I’m looking forward to seeing Godzilla and King Kong do battle in the next one.

Easily one of the best “Godzilla” films and one of the better giant monster films out there, “Godzilla: Final Wars” combines everything fun about these films. Most of the “Godzilla” films have a plot that often distracts from the cheesy but loveable action, that just is not that case with “Godzilla: Final Wars”.

When giant monsters attack locations across the globe, aliens rush to stop them and save the planet. However, all is not what it seems as the aliens were controlling the monsters the whole time. As our world faces destruction, the Earth Defence Force decides to awaken the ‘King of the Monsters’.

What makes this entry so refreshing is that we have human characters that we actually care about. Actually, some of them are mutants that help fight the giant monsters. These mutants are great because they actually add to the action rather than slow it down. We get to see tons of monsters from various “Godzilla” films such as Gigan, Anguirus, Rodan and some of the more obscure ones such as Ebirah and King Caesar. The only major one that seems to be missing is Mechagodzilla. We also get to see Godzilla fight the version of Godzilla from the underwhelming 1998 American version, who is appropriately just named ‘Zilla’ here.

Most of the “Godzilla” movies will not appeal to mainstream audiences but I think “Godzilla: Final Wars” is definitely an exception. This is a silly movie but you will fall in love with its over the top nature as you watch mutants, aliens and monsters all battle one another for the fate of the world. My only big complaint is that I wish Godzilla would have shown up a little earlier but we definitely get to see enough Godzilla action. The action is great, the special effects are good and the plot is surprisingly enjoyable.

“Godzilla Against Mechagodzilla” is an okay entry in the “Godzilla” franchise. It’s not one of the best ones but it is not poor by any means. The film delivers some enjoyable action sequences but I cannot help but feel that a lot of people that are not big fans of the series are going to be a little disappointed by this one.

In 1999, a new Godzilla appears and attacks Japan with the military being unable to repel him. In response, the Japanese government rushes to build a weapon that will be able to defeat Godzilla should he appear again. By 2003, Mechagodzilla has been built to battle for the survival of the nation. Godzilla is soon back on land and the fight will not be easy.

Many of the human characters are soldiers and scientists and I did not really have any problems with them. Godzilla looks fairly good and it’s interesting to see him as a bad guy again. In his first appearance, Mechagodzilla was the villain while Godzilla was the saviour of Japan. While it is intriguing to see the humans build Mechagodzilla to defend themselves, I still preferred him as a villain. I think the design of Mechagodzilla is pretty good and it’s a nice update from the original.

“Godzilla Against Mechagodzilla” starts off with a bang and there are some visually impressive battles on offer but a lot of the film feels a little generic. The movie has a polished look but at times, it just feels very vanilla. The movie has a somewhat anti-climactic ending, which I suppose is not surprising when considering it has a direct sequel (“Godzilla: Tokyo S.O.S.”). I think there are better “Godzilla” movies out there including “Godzilla vs. Mechagodzilla”. Fans of these movies will no doubt get some enjoyment from “Godzilla Against Mechagodzilla”.

“Godzilla 2000” was Toho’s attempt at keeping the “Godzilla” franchise alive after many serious fans were shocked at the American adaptation. For some of those fans, I guess this is an entertaining film but for me and anybody else, this is a really awful Japanese monster film.

In “Godzilla 2000”, Godzilla is back without any explanation because I’m pretty sure he died in the one before this. This time the guy in the rubber suit has to once again save Tokyo, this time from a giant flying saucer that turns into an even bigger monster. Although the last ten minutes or so is pretty fun, it’s a serious struggle to reach it.

A problem with all the “Godzilla” films, both Japanese and American, is that they spend way too much time with the humans. Nobody cares about what some boring person thinks in a monster movie (they’re like the teens in slasher films). Godzilla is alright once he starts punching the monster Orga, who sadly is not one of the more memorable foes of the series. I’ll admit that I get a major buzz from seeing guys in dinosaur and robot costumes wrestling with one another but the problem is that there just isn’t enough it.

I like some of the “Godzilla” films and there are plenty of giant monster films that I like but this one is just awful. Godzilla isn’t on the Moon and he doesn’t team up with Rodan or Mothra so there isn’t really anything that special about “Godzilla 2000” by “Godzilla” film standards. None of the “Godzilla” films are classics but this one is just painfully boring and slow at times. You know you are doing something wrong when parts of a film about a giant dinosaur stomping around Tokyo are as interesting as watching paint dry.

Godzilla has been in thirty films or more with remakes, sequels and prequels, he’s done them all. In 1998 American filmmakers misfired with “Godzilla” but this 2014 version isn’t much better despite definitely being closer to the Japanese “Godzilla” films.

In “Godzilla”, a dumb science experiment unleashes a horrific monster, named MUTO, and it starts tearing up the entire world. Guns, planes, tanks and bombs can’t stop him; only the mighty Godzilla is capable of beating this enemy and restoring order to the world. Sounds great but it’s too bad that the focus seems to be on the people and not the monsters.

The main character is a soldier played appallingly by Aaron Taylor-Johnson (“Kick-Ass”) and his scenes are totally distracting from the monster carnage. Godzilla looks okay but I prefer the good old days when it was a man in a rubber suit. Does anybody remember the time he fought King Kong?. The new monster isn’t as ridiculous as some of the ones in earlier films. He is good but he is just not as interesting to look at as some of the more bizarre creatures such as Mothra and Gigan. It’s fun to see it when Godzilla and MUTO fight (unfortunately that only really happens at the end).

The best “Godzilla” film might still be “Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure” when he had that little cameo but his own movies can be hit or miss. If you like the Japanese “Godzilla” pictures, you’ll be delighted to see this American version at least has Godzilla looking more like he should (it’s a significant improvement over the 1998 version) but for anybody else this is an underwhelming monster movie. So much of the action takes place at night making it hard to see what’s going on and they constantly cut away from the fighting to show the humans. Hopefully, the next one will bring back Ghidorah, the three-headed dragon that shoots lightning from its mouths.

A lot of critics seemed to despise “God’s Not Dead” but I found myself enjoying this tender tale about faith in the modern world. Many atheists will no doubt see this film as mere religious propaganda but I think many Christians, including myself, will finding something of value in here.

The film follows several different characters, whose stories are interwoven but the main focus is on Josh Wheaton (Shane Harper). He is a university student, who realises he must stand up for his beliefs when the hard-line atheistic Professor Radisson (Kevin Sorbo) demands his students agree that ‘God is dead’.

Most of the characters are not especially interesting and the performances are mediocre, with the exception of Kevin Sorbo as Professor Radisson. He is intellectually phenomenal but often comes across as cold, even to his Christian wife. We want to see the Josh character succeed even if he is not the most interesting of film heroes. I also admired the film for tackling some really controversial subjects by showing a Christian convert from a Muslim background and another from a communist Chinese background. Some of the folks from tv’s “Duck Dynasty” have a small role here in what comes across as one a really unsubtle piece of advertising.

“God’s Not Dead” is not exactly the most exciting film but I think it speaks about important issues regarding faith, science and public discourse. As I have already stated, I think Christians audiences will prefer it to non-religious audiences but I do hope that some of the atheists and agnostics that have seen it, found something worthwhile in the arguments made in the movie. Much like other Christian films such as the documentary “Jesus Camp”, audiences seem to be really polarised by “God’s Not Dead”. Films like this are unlikely to end the disagreement between believers and non-believers but it does at least meaningfully add to the debate.

“Glen or Glenda”, this is the first film by Ed Wood (“Plan 9 from Outer Space”), who is supposedly the worst director of all-time. It was to a film about sex changes but instead it’s a sort-of bio-pic about Ed Wood’s cross-dressing. ‘Beware the big green dragon’ this film warns us and it’s that style of bizarreness that makes this film both awful yet hilarious to sit through.

In “Glen Or Glenda”, we meet cross-dresser Glen (Wood) as he struggles with his lifestyle now that he’s engaged to a woman. Parts of it are like a public information film then we cut to endless stock footage (animals, wars, milk men… you name it) as well as several weird clips of Béla Lugosi (“Dracula”) yelling strange things at us including the sentence I quoted earlier.

Ed Wood is a terrible actor and he seems completely unnatural playing something that should be natural to him. Ed Wood is laughable here. Béla Lugosi is of course terrific, the scenes with him talking gibberish make the movie worth a watch for anybody that likes “Dracula” or “Son of Frankenstein”. Lugosi was also in some of Ed Wood’s other pictures and despite the fact the films are terrible, he’s always great.

“Glen Or Glenda” is obviously a bad film but like “Robot Monster” and “The Giant Claw”, it’s pretty funny. I think “Plan 9 from Outer Space” is better (and by that, I mean it’s even worse but that’s what makes it better). Béla Lugosi gives a great performance as he makes the lines that if uttered by anybody else would be merely stupid, grand… that’s about all I can say when defending this film. Everything else about it is horrendous but that’s why it’s been remembered. Ed Wood was a passionate moviemaker and he made his films incredibly poorly yet saw them as masterpieces. If you’re going to be bad, do it with love like he did and maybe you’ll be talked about in the years to come.

“Glass” is the final entry in a trilogy that started with “Unbreakable” nearly two decades earlier and was continued in “Split”. What director M. Night Shyamalan (“The Sixth Sense”) has achieved with these three movies is something very creative and special.

Vigilante ‘superhero’ David Dunn (Bruce Willis “Looper”, “The Whole Nine Yards”) prowls the streets in search of Kevin Wendell Crumb (James McAvoy “X-Men: First Class”), a criminal with 24 personalities. The two are captured and are taken to the same institution where Elijah Price (Samuel L. Jackson “Lakeview Terrace”) is being held. It is there that Dr. Ellie Staple (Sarah Paulson “Serenity”) is determined to show them that they are not the real-life version of comic book characters.

It’s great to see the three main characters together and the interactions between them are fantastic. James McAvoy gives an amazing performance as we get to see the majority of Kevin’s personalities this time. Samuel L. Jackson is also great as the mastermind that is ‘Mr. Glass’. Some may be disappointed in the lack of screen time that he gets. Bruce Willis is also really entertaining as David Dunn. Sarah Paulson is intriguing as Dr. Staple. The other characters are really good.

This is not a conventional superhero movie, this is more of a psychological thriller like “Unbreakable” and “Split”. Many of the twists in the movie are very intelligent, the use of colours in this movie is remarkable and there are plenty of disturbing moments in here. However, I do have some mixed views about the ending. I disliked what happens to the main characters (especially Willis’ character) and felt that it was a little anti-climactic. Overall, I enjoyed this movie more than “Split” and I think that it is about equal to “Unbreakable”. If you have not seen the previous two movies then watch them before you see “Glass”.

“Brothers, what we do in life… echoes in eternity” we hear in an early scene in “Gladiator” and it is that grand spectacle feel that dominates the film. Ridley Scott (“Alien”, “Blade Runner”) has directed a film that is pretty much a more violent and gritty update of Stanley Kubrick’s “Spartacus” and it is incredible.

In “Gladiator”, Maximus (Russell Crowe “Romper Stomper”, “A Beautiful Mind”) is a great Roman military leader, who is betrayed and his family murdered by Commodus (Joaquin Phoenix “Signs”, “The Master”). Forced to become a gladiator, he is soon sent to Rome to do battle in the Colosseum. There he becomes an icon to the people as he frustrates the schemes of the new Emperor.

Russell Crowe is excellent as a man that swears loyalty to Rome and will even challenge its new leader to save its people from tyranny. Joaquin Phoenix is surprisingly great as Commodus, a disturbing foe. The interactions between our hero and the villain are rather wonderful to watch. There are also great performances from Richard Harris (“Unforgiven”) and Derek Jacobi (“The King’s Speech”). Crowe and Harris have some great moments near the beginning of the film. I liked the small role played by Omid Djalili, which reminded me very much of his character in “The Mummy”.

I just adore historical films on such a big scope with so many costumes and spectacular architecture. The movie looks great and the gladiatorial sequences are terrific. My favourite scene is probably the battle in the Colosseum where tigers are thrown in, just to make everything all the more challenging. “Gladiator” is a tremendous epic that seems almost biblical at times as we see one man rise up to challenge one of the most powerful civilisations of the ancient world. If have not seen “Gladiator” then you are missing out on a masterpiece.

“Ghoulies” is allegedly a horror comedy but it is definitely awful. I enjoyed the “Gremlins” films and the first “Critters” picture was enjoyable so I went into this hoping for something good but what I got was absolutely atrocious.

There is no real plot in “Ghoulies” as it involves a man by the name of Jonathan (Peter Liapis) inheriting an old spooky house and begins trying to carry out pagan/satanic rituals in order to command demonic creatures. The creatures show up, a few people die and then we get an ending that makes no sense whatsoever and it has one of those cheesy cliffhanger endings that horror movies specialise in.

The acting in “Ghoulies” is among the worst I’ve ever seen in a movie. The actors somehow seem like they were more bored delivering their lines than I was watching this movie. Many of the characters wear sunglasses in many of the scenes, this was apparently because the film was going to have parts filmed in 3D and the audience could wear their 3D glasses when the characters were wearing sunglasses… it’s a stupid idea. The creatures that appear are really cheap and nasty and they lack any form of personality. If you remember the “Gremlins” movies, you’ll remember how individual many of the Gremlins were but here, they look terrible and do next to nothing.

There is nothing redeeming about “Ghoulies” as it isn’t even laughably bad in the way that films such as “Robot Monster” are. The dialog is awful, the monsters look poor, the plot is virtually non-existent, the attempted comedy is dreadful and the overall film is shockingly bad. What’s even more frightening is that there are sequels to this movie but I assume that they must be better than this because you have to be trying quite hard to make a film more painful than this.