“Mortal Kombat Legends: Scorpion's Revenge” is easily the best “Mortal Kombat” film and one of the best videogames movies to date. It’s not a great film by any means but it’s a fun and stylish animated picture that certainly captures the violent and enjoyable style of the hit videogame franchise.

In “Scorpion’s Revenge”, a fearless warrior and his family are brutally murdered by the deadly Sub-Zero. In his quest for vengeance, the warrior becomes the ninja ‘Scorpion’ and enters into the Mortal Kombat tournament so that he can face his enemy once more. The tournament shall decide the fate of the Earth realm.

Although the film is titled “Scorpion’s Revenge”, Scorpion is not in the film as much as you might expect. We also get to see Liu Kang, Sonya Blade, Johnny Cage, Goro, Shang Tsung, Raiden and others. Scorpion was easily my favourite character though. I do wish we had got to see more of Sub-Zero because his ice powers are really impressive. Although I’m not massively into the animation style, the characters do all look pretty good for the most part. Some will find it to be a good thing that they are animated and not live-action because the violence in this movie is intense.

“Scorpion’s Revenge” is not a kids’ film by any stretch of the imagination. The violence in this film is as shocking as you can get for an animated movie. It’s even more violent than “Ninja Scroll”. Prepare to see stabbings, decapitations, skulls torn out and bones being snapped. Many fans will of the videogames will love it because the live-action “Mortal Kombat” movies from the 90s lacked the gore. If you are not into the games then skip this but if you are, I think you will be very satisfied with what is on offer.

The first film based on “Mortal Kombat” wasn’t exactly good but you have to give it some credit. However, this sequel is laughably bad. “Mortal Kombat: Annihilation” operates on the same wavelength as “Power Rangers”. This means that no matter how cheap, cheesy and dumb it seems, you will at least chuckle a few times.

I applaud the filmmakers of the first film for making an actual plot that revolves around a game (a fun game I might add) simply about fighting. All of that is ditched in this sequel as we get a cartoonish storyline that is about as deep and meaningful as the game itself.

Only a few of the cast members returned for this sequel despite the fact one was clearly in the works from the first movie’s ending. This means you can tell how thrilled the stars were about doing another one of these pictures. Everybody in this film from Brian Thompson as the main villain, Shao-Khan, to James Remar (“The Phantom”, “Red”) as the good guy’s master, Raiden, all seem to possess acting skills on par with the likes of Tor Johnson (“Plan 9 from Outer Space”) and Dolph Lundgren (“Rocky IV”) as they deliver some of the corniest lines ever written. They also fight about as believably as the characters in a Bugs Bunny cartoon.

Movies based on videogames are generally bad and “Mortal Kombat: Annihilation” is a clear example of that as it is a bad film in its own right. It has the worst special effects since “Superman IV: The Quest for Peace” with them making the first film look really good, a repetitive plot, pitiful performances and average at best fight scenes. The film also doesn’t have a great deal to do with the games, excluding even the most die-hard fans that might have given this film a second look. It is a seriously weak flick but it has some comedic value.

Clearly taking inspiration from “Star Wars”, “Mortal Engines” tries to create an immersive sci-fi/fantasy world. It was produced by Peter Jackson, famous for his “Lord of the Rings” movies and his 2005 remake of “King Kong”. “Mortal Engines” has received mixed reviews and I’m surprised because it’s a lot better than other recent sci-fi movies such as “The Maze Runner” and “The Hunger Games”.

Set in the distant future, “Mortal Engines” shows a world where large mobile cities roam what’s left of the planet as they scavenge for resources and consume smaller mobile towns and villages. Thaddeus Valentine (Hugo Weaving “The Matrix”, “Captain America: The First Avenger”) hopes to lead the mobile city of London to victory over the anti-tractionists, who live behind a fortified wall.

Although Hugo Weaving does a good job as the villain, the other characters are pretty disappointing. We have completely forgettable protagonists such as Hester (Hera Hilmar “Anna Karenina”) and Tom (Robert Sheehan). There’s also a cyborg that looks so much like the Terminator that it would not be surprised if a court case came about. The characters really are the weakest aspect of this film and that’s a shame. Movies such as “Star Wars”, “Blade Runner”, “Alien” all have great characters that help make visiting their unique worlds more interesting.

“Mortal Engines” features some exhilarating special effects and some very impressive world-building. The steampunk aesthetic is just great here. I would have preferred it if it had better characters and if it stole less plot elements from the original “Star Wars”. I love the concept of the giant mobile cities battling one another and I would have enjoyed if more of the run-time had been dedicated to showing that. What is on offer here is definitely superior to “The Maze Runner” and “The Hunger Games”. It’s disappointing we probably will not see a sequel to “Mortal Engines” because there’s plenty of steam still left in this machine.

The man behind such hit songs as “Thriller” and “Smooth Criminal”, Michael Jackson, stars in this strange film about himself, which defies any means of logic and seems to have virtually no consistency.

The movie starts off with self-indulgent tripe, telling us just how great Michael Jackson is and then we see a strange version of his song “Bad” featuring kids. Then some weird stuff that I can’t explain through words happens. Then a revolution occurs as we are put through Michael’s song “Leave Me Alone”. Then Michael Jackson has to stop some drug dealers with magical powers and save some children.

Michael Jackson is simply horrible, he’s so bland and very inconsistent but then again, he’s playing himself so maybe he’s doing a good job. However, that doesn’t make it entertaining. The idea of Michael Jackson having magical powers and saving children from drug dealers is just stupid beyond belief. His singing is very impressive though, what else do you expect from the King of Pop? Joe Pesci (“Casino”, “Goodfellas”) is hilariously bad as the drug dealer. The children in this film are horrific actors and actresses; they’re not acting at all. I wouldn’t be surprised if they are reading from oversized cards. The animation is horrendously poor.

The storyline is virtually non-existent, the special effects are poorly done, the characters are boring and the logic is violently murdered in the most obnoxious way possible. The music is good though. Few films exceed the stupidity of this zany picture. The only bit worth watching (even for fans of Jackson’s music) is an extended version of “Smooth Criminal” as the rest is just a barrage of ridiculous antics that don’t go together at all. This is like someone finished a jigsaw puzzle but actually they’ve just rammed random pieces together as nothing in this movie fits together; it’s just lots of little weird bits. Even the videogame based on the film is not as bad as the actual film.

“Moonraker” isn’t a good “James Bond” film, which is a shame as I feel it has plenty of good moments. However, it somehow finds the time to ruin itself. This is another campy Roger Moore (“The Spy Who Loved Me”) adventure centred on our hero James Bond.

In this movie, James Bond must take down a rich businessman, named Hugo Drax (Michael Lonsdale “Munich”). I found that things seem to be going well, some good “James Bond” stuff happening despite there being some silly moments but then comes the killer. Yes, the last part of the film has our hero James Bond going into space and henchman Jaws (Richard Kiel “Happy Gilmore”) become a softy.

Roger Moore is okay as James Bond. He’s never been my favourite. Michael Lonsdale is weak as the villain Hugo Drax and the material he has is poor. Jaws is relatively good but as I mentioned earlier, he ends up becoming everything a “James Bond” bad guy should never become. Lois Chiles (“Death On The Nile”) stars as the love interest, Holly Goodhead, and is alright but not one of the best girls in the franchise. The one-liners are really cringeworthy like they normally are but this movie contains probably the worst as James Bond and Holly have some time alone in space with comments about ‘re-entry’ being attempted.

The whole space part of the film is a shameless attempt to cash-in on “Star Wars” with lasers being blasted. The acting is mediocre while the action is not the best. Until the space part, I thought “Moonraker” may be worth checking out even if you’re just a casual fan and despite not being one of the worst in the series, it certainly isn’t one of the better ones either. “Moonraker” has enjoyable moments but does feel ruined by the level of cheesiness, especially towards the end of the film.

“Moon” has been hailed as a modern sci-fi classic. Thematically, it is similar to “2001: A Space Odyssey”, “The Martian”, “Sunshine” and even “Dark Star” but I think all those movies are far superior to this. This is boring film that opts for a cheap twist and reveals all its cards way too early.

In “Moon”, Sam Bell (Sam Rockwell “The Green Mile”, “Matchstick Men”) is an astronaut nearing the end of his three-year contract on the Moon. His work provides the energy for the majority of Earth but it is awful lonely with his only companion being a computer by the name of G.E.R.T.Y. (voiced by Kevin Spacey “Superman Returns”).

Sam Rockwell is an okay performer but I just could not get invested in his character. Other films set in space seem much more effective in capturing what it must be like to be alone in space. I feel this movie rushes through a lot and could have done with being longer to give us more time to understand Sam. Kevin Spacey is fine as G.E.R.T.Y. but you keep expecting the computer to turn like H.A.L. 9000 in “2001: A Space Odyssey”. You end up feeling like they wasted a great talent because Spacey is a terrific actor but he just is not given anything interesting to do here.

“Moon” is definitely a better astronaut movie than “Gravity” (another overrated sci-fi flick) but it is still a very flawed film. The big twist feels so cheap because we have all seen it in other movies. I recommend watching “2001: A Space Odyssey”, “The Martian”, “Sunshine” and “Dark Star” over “Moon” as I think they are better at capturing some of the ideas seen here. I am always disappointed in seeing a sci-fi movie like this because it’s clear the filmmakers want to make you think, they are just not skilled enough to pull it off.

“Killing Salazar” (also known as “Cartels”) is another underwhelming action flick with Steven Seagal (“Hard To Kill”, “Marked For Death”) plastered all over the poster. It’s that usual combination of mediocre action sequences, a bland storyline, bad editing and dialog that could put you to sleep.

A drug lord (Florin Piersic Jr.) is captured and is being protected until he can testify against his criminal colleagues. A team of soldiers are tasked with keeping him safe at a hotel in Romania. However, somebody has been leaking information and now armed men are attacking the building. Who is the mole? What happened? We will find out answers to these questions in good time.

The real star of the movie is not Seagal but Luke Goss (“Tekken”, “Death Race 2”) as one of the soldiers guarding the drug lord. He’s like a cheap version of Jason Statham (“The Transporter”) and not remotely convincing. Maybe he should have stuck to his music career. Seagal does not get to do all that much. Most of the time, he is just sat behind a desk. The fight sequences are almost laughable as they frequently involve stunt doubles that are far slimmer than he has been for many years. The other characters are unimpressive and forgettable.

“Killing Salazar” features a lot of shootouts and fistfights but none of them are very good. It’s hard to make a film boring film when there is a lot of action happening but this movie manages to do just that. I just did not care about the plot at all so all the ‘revelations’ at the end did nothing for me. Neither Goss nor Seagal look believable as action stars here. This is an embarrassing action flick but I didn’t expect all that much from it. Just don’t bother with “Killing Salazar” or “Cartels” or whatever it’s called.

“Monty Python and the Holy Grail” reminds us why we cherish the “Monty Python” franchise so much by delivering some very memorable moments.

King Arthur (Graham Chapman “The Life of Brian”) and his knights on sent on a mission by God to find the Holy Grail. On their journey they encounter various silly obstacles ranging from the Knights Who Say Ni, a killer rabbit, the Black Knight who can fight without any of his limbs. Can King Arthur and his knights find the Holy Grail? Or will their quest finish prematurely? Find out as laughter unfolds in “Monty Python and the Holy Grail”.

The “Monty Python” gang are funny. Here they deliver quite a lot of stuff that really works. The funniest character is the ‘Taunting French Guard’ played by John Cleese (“Clockwise”, “Rat Race”). The Bridgekeeper or ‘The Old Man from Scene 24’ as he sometimes know played by Terry Gilliam (“Fear And Loathing In Las Vegas”) is one of the more amusing characters in the picture too. Occasionally you find the gang will do a bit that just isn’t funny and sometimes this can go on for quite a while. For the most part I was impressed with the cast.

“Monty Python” films seem to have trouble keeping it altogether for a film as even in this one, the writing makes it feel like the makers are writing sketches and not a whole movie. With other spoofs such as “Airplane!”, “Spaceballs” or even “Young Frankenstein”, you don’t get that problem. Aside from that though, I found that this is a fun British comedy and it will make you feel you’re watching something very familiar as it has inspired countless imitators over the many years since its release. I believe this is one of the few sequels that is better than its original as to me, this is superior to the first of the “Monty Python” movies.

“Devil” is a hilariously bad supernatural thriller. It gives us a premise that might make for a great thriller but the inclusion of the supernatural elements just makes it absurd. The film takes itself way too seriously and it just becomes a total joke.

A group of strangers get stuck in the lift of a large building. The staff at the building try to repair the lift but nothing seems to be working. It isn’t long before one of them turns up dead. As the police now try to figure out what is going on, there are signs that a demonic force may be among the people in the lift.

The group of people are just not all that exciting. This is a movie that needs strong characters but we just don’t really connect with any of them. I didn’t care whether any of them lived or died. The funniest character isn’t even on the lift. It’s Ramirez (Jacob Vargas “Heaven Is For Real”), a security guy and a devout Christian. He believes that the Devil may be at work and he knows this because he throws some toast with jam on it and it lands with the jam side facing the floor. No, I’m not kidding. That’s seriously his logic. The Devil in this movie is rather forgettable.

“Devil” could almost work as thriller in the style of the ones by Alfred Hitchcock (“Psycho”) if you just removed the supernatural elements. As it is, this is a movie with a serious tone that does not fit the cheesy nature of the events that are unfolding. It’s not scary, the mystery is stupid because we have a supernatural force that can defy conventional rules and it’s just pretty boring. It’s a shame because the opening sequence with the camera showing the city upside-down actually looks really good and there is some genuine tension at times.

“Monkeybone” is a lot like the movie “Heavy Metal” as they’re both pervert nonsense loosely strung together and called a movie. “Monkeybone” is apparently a comedy but it serves better as toilet gag nightmare fuel.

In “Monkeybone”, a shy cartoonist, named Stu (Brendan Fraser “The Mummy”, “Furry Vengeance”), creates a cheeky and sex-obsessive animated monkey, named ‘Monkeybone’ (voiced by John Turturro “Barton Fink”). Stu ends up in a coma and meets Monkeybone in a creepy limbo environment not unlike something from “Beetlejuice” where Monkeybone finds a way back into the real world but inside Stu’s body. It felt like a gauntlet for me as the viewer as I was faced with gross humour such as a monkey sticking his thumb in places he shouldn’t, terrifying creations such as giant bug with a human face and various other awful elements.

Brendan Fraser is completely boring here and it doesn’t matter whether he’s being the normal guy, the outrageous animated character trapped in his body or someone in a coma as he’s just unwatchable. The Monkeybone character is by far the worst thing in the entire movie and I was surprised Turturro has lowered himself to starring in a movie like this as the material completely prevents him from delivering a milligram of good or even mediocre comedy. Whoopi Goldberg (“Sister Act”) plays Death and she doesn’t help either. Maybe the cast all committed serious crimes and this was their punishment, sure they don’t go to prison but it means you’re no longer safe on the streets because someone will recognise them.

Most movies I review give me something good to say but the few films that receive this rating force me to write entirely one-sided articles. “Monkeybone” doesn’t contain a single frame that is enjoyable and isn’t even ‘Pandora’s box’ because there isn’t even that little shred of hope here. It’s a movie with the dignity completely removed and I have no respect for “Monkeybone” so if you ever bump into me, don’t mention this film without expecting a fight to break out.