Games: One Finger Death Punch Review

December 17, 2014

I’m all for variety in gaming, and having finished off the AAA title Far Cry 3 last weekend, I decided my next game should be something completely different.

So I took a look at my Steam Library to find a game I’d bought and not played yet (and believe me, there are plenty of them), and decided to try The Last Tinker: City of Colors, and when that turned out to be guff, I put on One Finger Death Punch instead.

One Finger Death Punch Review: The Statistics

Platform: PC (also available on Xbox Indie Games)
Game Type: Minimalistic Combat
Theme: You play as a ninja who must repel constant waves of attack to his left and right.
Scores: Full marks across the board, with the game getting ratings no lower than 9/10 in most places.

One Finger Death Punch Review: My Thoughts

In direct contrast to the sometimes over-complicated and drawn out nature of AAA gaming titles, One Finger Death Punch is simple, easy to play (yet hard to master) and 100% fun.2014-12-16_00001

With only two buttons – X to punch enemies on your left and B to attack the ones on your right – it’s a game that anyone can get the hang of with practice, but the key to it is that it has depth.

Rather than being a button mashing game, as the difficulty level increases and the variety of enemies and styles of attack change (for example, some enemies need to be hit more than once to die, while others will require a combination of X and B button taps to defeat) it becomes an exercise in concentration and skill. Missing your target and not hitting the button at the right time leaves you open to losing your own health, so you have to be careful.

And I love that sort of thing. No, it didn’t take me long to polish off the Student levels (there are harder options where enemies attack faster and in greater numbers) but I thoroughly enjoyed it while it lasted and it gave me more than enough bang for my buck on that single play-through.

And should I choose to, I can go back and replay it all over again without feeling like I’ve been there and done that already.

So with that said, if you have Steam or an Xbox 360, then you should absolutely give it a go.

You won’t regret it.

 

 


TLC 2014 Shows WWE At It’s Lowest Ebb

December 15, 2014

WWE is terrible these days, it really is.

I’ve just finished watching – or should I say fast forwarding through – their latest PPV event, Tables, Ladders, Chairs & Stairs and I find myself with an interest in the product that is the lowest it has ever been.

And I know I said that earlier this year, but it’s just gotten worse.

This was an event that played out in front of a mostly dead audience as wrestlers put themselves through the mill, battering each other with tables, chairs, steel steps etc and throwing themselves through tables. WWE-TLCEssentially, in a bid to impress, these guys were just hurting each other. What’s the point? Did I care when I saw Dolph Ziggler fall off a ladder for the thirtieth time that night? No, of course not. I’m completely desensitized to watching stuff like that and it’s actually quite sad to see these guys doing riskier and riskier stuff in the hope of seeming fresh.

But that’s the key word right there; fresh. WWE is not even the least bit fresh; rather it’s the stalest it’s ever been.

Not only is there too much of it on TV – we really don’t need to see three hours of this shit every Monday night and then another three hours every fourth Sunday – but the stuff that’s on just gets repeated ad nauseam.

Anything remotely interesting – like the once humourous Damien Mizdow stuff – gets squeezed of every little bit of appeal it has and then still gets done for months afterwards.

Meanwhile, the same booking tactics that have failed in the past get rehashed to the annoyance of the audience. The bit last night where Cena and Rollins went through the table together was a waste of time, while Roman ‘We’ll Accept Him Whether We Want To Or Not’ Reigns was pushed down our throats yet again. Do they not realise that by trying too hard with him, the core audience will reject him? Do they never learn?

Also, the same matches play out on TV and then on PPV week after week after week. How many times can we watch the same four of five tag teams having the same match? How many times can we listen to Lana talking about Vladimir Putin, or Rusev facing Jack Swagger? How many times can the Big Show turn heel and feud with John Cena?

It’s soul-destroying.

You’ve only got to look at the talent roster to see the problem. This year as far as I can see, only three new male wrestlers were promoted to the main roster; Rusev, Bo Dallas and Adam Rose. The rest of them have been around for years. You’ve got guys like the Big Show, Mark Henry and Kane who have been kicking about non-stop since the 1990s and then a huge bulk of talent who have been active since the mid 2000s.

And they just face each other week after week and nothing ever changes.

Compare that to the NXT event from this past Thursday. Now sure, I don’t watch NXT every week, so it does hold a certain freshness that WWE just can’t copy, but it seemed a far better show in every way. The crowd was into it, the matches told stories rather than just ambled from spot to spot and it didn’t overstay its welcome.

So how can WWE overcome this problem with its main talent roster?

As far as I can see it would be to have less of it on TV, but that doesn’t seem likely. Beyond that, have more wrestlers on the roster to provide something a bit different, and also punt some of the guys who have been on the go forever.

Something has to change though, because I – like a lot of people I’m sure – am just watching out of habit these days.


Games: Far Cry 4 Review (or “Dear Games Developers: Give Us Something Fresh, Please!!”)

December 9, 2014

I’ve not written anything in a wee while, so I thought I’d drop by to discuss the latest game I’ve been playing, Far Cry 4.

Now here’s a game that I’ve spent the last week or so playing pretty heavily. Indeed, I’ve notched up around 20 hours on it, to the point where my life has been work, Far Cry 4 and the occasional episode of The Simpsons (Seasons 2-9 inclusive of course; anything else just wouldn’t do).farcry4

Today I “finished” it and it’s time to jot down my thoughts.

I say “finished” because apparently only completed 50.7% of the overall experience, but that’s enough for me anyway.

Far Cry 4 Review – The Statistics

Platform: PS4
Game Type: Open World GTA-esque,
Theme: Set in the fictional Asian state of Kyrat, you play as the son of the founder of a freedom fighting movement who has returned to the country and is asked to help liberate it from the clutches of the nefarious Pagan Min.
General Scores: Pretty highly rated. It gets around 8/10 on most sites.

Far Cry 4 Review – My Thoughts

As much as I enjoyed certain aspects of Far Cry 4 – and I mean with that level of time commitment I must have, otherwise it’d just be idiotic – the main thing I’ve come away from it feeling is that single player gaming really needs to try something fresh.

The only thing that separates Far Cry 4 from GTA, Saints Row, Red Dead Redemption, Crackdown, Bully, Skyrim, Oblivion, Borderlands or any number of AAA title is the environment.

I definitely felt it was something I’d played many times before and it’ll be something I’ll inevitably pay £40 to play again with a fresh lick of paint in a few months time.

Here’s the checklist of what’s in it that you’ll have come across in another game…

  • You’ve got your main story mode complete with tiresomely long cut scenes that you don’t care about and yet can’t skip.
  • A variety of side missions that are usually more fun but get so repetitive that you begin to lose interest after a while.
  • One of those side mission varieties is a racing game that you really don’t give a toss about.
  • There’s the scavenging for different leaves to help you make potions (in this case syringes)
  • There’s the hunting bit.
  • There’s the conclusion to the storyline where you feel slightly betrayed.
  • The bit where you’re accidentally on drugs so that development team can make things go all weird and spaced out.
  • The needless bit where you start a mission and then have to drive right the way across the map just to pick something up or shoot someone.
  • The wee notes/journals you can look at to read that have absolutely no bearing on the game.
  • The pretence of open-worldness when there really isn’t. In this case it’s the idea that all the crates and boxes are worth searching, but they aren’t.
  • The bit where you go from thinking “Wow, this map is so wonderfully vast; I can’t wait to explore it” to “I’ll just click Fast Travel from now on”

And don’t get me wrong; some of it is great. I loved doing the hunting (up until the point I realised that once I killed a certain amount of each type of animal it became pointless to bother about it) and was in my element mixing the combination of stealthy sniping and no-frills shotgun brutality when liberating outposts and radio towers.

But other bits left me cold. I just couldn’t be bothered with the side missions for the two druggie blokes and instead longed to murder them, and if I wanted to play a racing game I’d put on Mario Kart.

Also, as you may have gathered from my comment above, the main story mode was a bit crap. But they always are, aren’t they?

Where this game falls down though is that at 50.7%, I’ve had enough. To keep going would just be completing it for the sake of completing it. Having unlocked the most powerful weapons, there’s no challenge left in completing the side missions now and I’d just be going through the motions.

Compare that to the best example of this genre ever – Red Dead Redemption – and that’s a big failing. Red Dead made me want to complete 100% of the game because everything about it was superb.

This – as good as it looks – isn’t at that level.

Having said all that, it still took over my life for four days and up until the point where I realised I’d have enough, it more than offered value for money.

So on that basis, I’d recommend it.

But I implore the big game studios; give us something fresh soon please. Surely this type of game has long since been over-saturated?


Movies: The Imitation Game Review (or “Whatever Happened To Linear Storytelling?”)

November 23, 2014

Whatever happened to linear storytelling?

You know what I mean by that right? A story that starts at the beginning and moves forward until the end.

Whether it’s TV or film, it just seems like most writers or directors don’t want to present their tales in a natural order anymore.

In some cases, it’s a deliberate gimmick, in others it’s to mask the inadequacy of the script, but often it just feels like it’s done like that for the sake of it.

And that’s what it felt like with The Imitation Game; the new movie about cryptographer Alan Turing and his team’s successful attempt to crack the German Enigma machine in World War II.imitation

It takes place over three time zones – before, during and after the war – and jumps back and forth between them.

I could understand if it worked in such a way where it starts with him being brought in for questioning, flashes back to the story of how he cracked Enigma and then finished back in 1951, but that’s not what it does. It starts half way through the events of 51, goes back to the start of the war, jumps back to 51 for the beginning of the storyline there, then back to 1940, then to his school years in the 1920s and so on and so forth.

It felt unnecessarily jumbled and it could have been done slightly better.

The other issue with it was that it didn’t seem to know quite what it wanted to be.

Is it about cracking Enigma or is it about Turing and his struggles with homosexuality at a time when it was illegal? There’s no reason why it can’t be about both of course, but the two storylines didn’t feel particularly well connected, and ending up clashing towards the end.

But that’s not to say it wasn’t enjoyable, because it was. Indeed, I’d say it was a better movie than the movie I reviewed earlier this week, Interstellar.

What worked for it was that it was interesting and informative and also involved a high standard of actor. Naturally the likes of Cumberbatch and Knightley were at home playing period roles, but the most entertaining character for me was Charles Dance, who basically has his pick of “Bastard In Authority” roles thanks to him being pretty much the only good thing about Game of Thrones.

And unlike Interstellar, it didn’t out-stay its welcome.

So go and see it;  it’s definitely worth a watch.


Movies: Interstellar Review (or “Hollywood Blockbuster In Copying Red Dwarf Shock”)

November 18, 2014

There are a number of angles I could approach a review of Interstellar from; so much so that I could spend all day deliberating over the best one.

But I’ll try to just be as straight-forward about it as possible without going into so much detail that it’ll spoil things

Interstellar Review: What’s It About?

Flavour of the Month, Matthew McConaughey goes into space in a bid to find a new habitable planet for the at-risk-of-extinction human race to live on, seeing as Earth has decided to pack it in.

Thoughts – Is It Any Good?

To be blunt, it’s not great.

There are a number of reasons for this.

1. It Went On For Too Long

This idea that big budget movies have to go on for near on three hours these days really annoys me. As a trimmed down 110 minutes long this could have been snappy and enjoyable, but for long spells – especially ininterstellar3 the middle – it felt like a real slog.

What could have gone? Plenty.

Take for example the 45 minutes or so wasted on Matt Damon. What was the point? Was it just because Hollywood logic dictates that there has to be a villain placing a hero in peril at some point? Or is it that Damon has struck a deal with someone, somewhere to guarantee that he’s in everything these days?

2. You Knew From The Moment It Started That It Would End Happily

And that’s not just because all Hollywood blockbusters feel the need to have a happy ending.

You knew that it would have a happy ending because the very first people to appear in the film are people from the future who were young at the time the movie is set.

Once again, this is this notion that everything has to have a prolepsis scene at the start these days.

An adventurous director in 2014 would try to tell a story from a linear perspective.

3. The Last 45 Minutes Were Ridiculous

Even though I could get my head around what went on with the black hole, it doesn’t mean it wasn’t ridiculous. I can imagine plenty of people left confused. I didn’t though because…

4. It Was Clichéd

You’ll read plenty of people discuss how groundbreaking Interstellar was and how it touched upon new ideas. It didn’t. Not really. That’s not to say that it should be marked down hugely for it since almost everything is borrowed from somewhere else, but for a guy who watches Science Fiction type stuff regularly, I can identify where just about every main idea Nolan used came from, whether they be The Girl in the Fireplace, Red Dwarf or dozens of other sources.

The problem is that people will forgive all of this and proclaim it a masterpiece because it’s a Christopher Nolan film and there’s this Emperor’s New Clothes idea that he’s a genius.

I tend to find I don’t want to ever watch any of his movies again, so I’m not sure why he’s so revered.

Now none of this is to say that it was a bad film. The idea was interesting enough, it was visually top-notch and it also had a grand and impressive musical score from Hans “My Best Work Was The BBC Going For Gold Theme” Zimmer (which makes a change from the usual stuff from tired old John Williams).

I just didn’t think it justified the hype.

Or to put it another way, it was style over substance.

And like I’ve already said – and this is the main problem at the heart of it – it was just too long.

Give me the brisk 90 minutes of Gravity over this any day.


Doctor Who – Dark Water & Death In Heaven Review (or “Long Live Peter Capaldi”)

November 8, 2014

And so the latest season of Doctor Who draws to a close.

Compared against any season in the show’s history, this has more than held its own in terms of quality, but especially after how poor Matt Smith’s final season – excluding the late 2013 specials – was, it just seems all the better.

Still, if you’ll recall, the last review I did wasn’t exactly favourable.

Following a run of six quality stories in a row, they hit a brick wall with In the Forest of the Night.

So my hope was that the season would reclaim its consistency in the two-part finale, Dark Water & Death In Heaven.

Did it?

Doctor Who – Dark Water & Death In Heaven Review: What’s This One About?

The Master is back…and she’s a woman now!

And the Cybermen are back, and they don’t say much!!

And Danny Pink dies!!!

And Clara Leaves!!!!

Or Does She??????

And The Brigadier makes a comeback from beyond the grave!!!!!

Oh Em Gee!!!!!!!!

Thoughts – Storylines Wrapped Up, Even When They Didn’t Make Sense

It’s always a good thing to wrap up a story-arc, and to Steven Moffat’s credit, he did that on every count with this story.

Whether it was the mystery of Missy, the bits about dead people, the “Who left the ad in the paper/Who gave Clara the number” stuff, the “Am I A Good Man” question, the Danny Pink/Clara story or even giving a fitting send-off to a character whose actor died a few

To be fair, this Cyberman is more convincing as Nicholas Courtney than Sylvester McCoy in a wig was as Colin Baker

To be fair, this Cyberman is more convincing as Nicholas Courtney than Sylvester McCoy in a wig was as Colin Baker

years ago, this two-parter managed it.

And I liked that.

I especially liked the end to Danny Pink’s story. It was quite a shock at the beginning of Dark Water when he was killed off, but everything that followed it made sense to me, and the way he managed to save the day not only suited the writing of his character, but it also settled his issues with the Doctor and Clara. Powerful stuff.

No, Danny’s character and the romance storyline is not to everyone’s liking, but hey, that’s just tough. It appeals to me as much as the other elements of the show, but it’ll also appeal to people who are less interested in elements like the Cybermen.

Meanwhile, though it may be a bit cheesy, and though it may also not make a huge amount of sense that one Cyberman evaded Danny Pink’s orders, it was still a powerful moment to see the Doctor – and the viewer – get a chance to salute and say goodbye to the Brigadier. That was more emotional than it had every right to be.

But if I was to criticise anything about the wrapping up of story-arcs, it would be the one about how Missy had engineered it so that Clara and the Doctor would come together. Maybe I’m just missing something obvious, but I don’t think it was explained all that well. Yes, she did it, but why? Who knows.

And speaking of Missy…

A Female Master: Does It Set A Precedent?

First off, in spite of her suddenly becoming Scottish in the second episode when she wasn’t in the first, I thought that Michelle Gomez was excellent.

Unlike the terrible John Simms, she managed to combine being amusing with a large dollop of menace, and unlike any actor to play the part since Roger Delgado, she actually made the Master seem multi-layered and likeable.

But should she be a woman?

Well on the one hand, why not? It’s never been explicitly stated on TV that a Time Lord can’t change gender through regeneration. Indeed it’s been quite the reverse.

From an equal opportunities sense, why shouldn’t a woman be able to take on a role and make it her own, if she’s good enough?

But on the other hand, what it does is set a precedent. If the Master can become female then why not the Doctor? That’s what the tabloids have been after since the 1980s.

Well call me sexist if you like – even though I don’t think I am being – but I’d rather the Doctor didn’t become a woman.

I mean, I don’t think he ever will, because ultimately any casting of a female in the title role would be seen as gimmicky hot-shotting, but even beyond that, it just wouldn’t feel right.

It’s not wrong to say that the character of the Doctor is male, and that the dynamic of male Doctor, female companion works. Why change it?

The Cybermen: Best Seen But Not Heard

Meanwhile, the Cybermen are back.

When I heard that the finale would be a two-part story involving them I groaned with anguish. Why?!

The Pink Slip: In there just in case idiots hadn't worked it out yet

The Pink Slip: In there just in case idiots hadn’t worked it out yet

But to be fair, they were well handled here.

First of all, despite I think everyone watching knowing fine it was them in the dark water, it was written and handled with the right amount of pacing so that it still had the entertainment factor.

In the second episode, they were used the only way I think they can be these days – as silent back-up to a more charismatic villain.

In the 70s and 80s, the Cybermen only worked when they went against type. You all know I love the Christopher Robbie Cyber Leader, and have a soft spot for David Banks’ efforts too, but with the way the Cybermen are presented these days, that sort of character could never make a comeback.

So instead, Moffat went with Tobias Vaughn/Invasion Cybermen dynamic and presented them as mostly non-speaking background foot soldiers.

That worked better.

And let’s hope that’s an end to them for a long time, with the only exception being if they come back as Tenth Planet ones.

That would be awesome.

The Supposedly Offensive Subject Matter

I couldn’t believe it when I read that people had complained to the BBC about the subject matter of Dark Water.

Apparently, some viewers found the notion of the afterlife being presented as a con, while people from beyond the grave praying that they aren’t going to be cremated was deemed upsetting and offensive.

Give me a break.

The sort of people who do that just make me shake my head.

It’s a TV show. It’s fiction. Please take that piece of information in.

I’ve never understood how people can be so moved by a TV show that they feel they have to complain.

What is it I’m missing? Is it that some people are so entrenched in their beliefs of the uncertain (for that is what an afterlife is) that they can’t accept anyone having a differing opinion, or is it that by questioning it, it makes them question themselves and they don’t like it.

Either way it’s just bloody stupid. It’s like people who get scared by horror movies. The bad man with the knife is not coming out of the TV to get you, you fools.

Random Observations

  • Killing off Osgood was a bit of a shocker, but I liked it. What it did was give Missy some level of credibility, and it added some uncertainty as to the outcomes of the other incidental characters.
  • And I was more surprised that they killed off Kate, until I realised they hadn’t.
  • The Doctor’s freefall into the TARDIS was more than a little bit ridiculous, but it was still also fun.
  • And his line on the plane to Missy about how she’s always wanted to rule the world, and he managed it without even trying was fantastic.
  • I hope the long running references to the Doctor being the General of his own army now get rested for a few years.
  • Not only was it poor form for the Next Time trailer after In the Forest of the Night to include a scene from an episode two weeks later, but the “I’ve never been Clara Oswald” stuff was a total bait and switch.
  • Chris Addison is a bit of an over-actor, let’s be honest.
  • Clara, meanwhile comes across as a certifiable nutter at the start. I accept she was grief-stricken but what she planned on doing to the Doctor at the volcano was poor form.
  • And wouldn’t they be sweating a bit more if they were at a volcano? Ok, I know that they weren’t, but at one point we were supposed to believe they were.
  • Danny being a Cyberman was something I didn’t expect to see, but I liked it.
  • When Clara told him – without realising who he was – that the Doctor was the one she trusted more than anyone, it was a sad moment.
  • And by the way, having the camera zoom in on the name in his hand was unnecessary for anyone with a brain and reasoning skills.
  • Probably the funniest moment over the course of both episodes was the bit where you hear the scream of someone who has left their body to science.
  • I think we know that this is not the end for Clara, but even so, if it was, that would have been a nice way for her to go. Ultimately, she’s not going to be in the show for too much longer you wouldn’t have thought, so that would have been a nice point for her to bow out.
  • Does the Doctor still keep a spare key in David Tennant’s coat?
  • I don’t get why Dr Chang said something nice to Missy when she said “I’ll only kill you when you say something nice”. Why not tell her to piss off and then leave? Surely the worst that could happen was already going to happen?
  • Why didn’t Clara hear a crash or any sort of noise when Danny got hit by the car?
  • The notion that the Cybermen could turn the dead into more Cybermen is hokey, but I can live with it. It certainly made for some good visuals.
  • If the Cyberman had said “Nice to see you again” before shooting Missy, I’d have loved it.
  • I would have preferred it if Missy had turned out to be either Susan or Romana. They could have made that make sense easily.
  • Yay, it’s Santa Claus
  • Noooooooo, he’s played by Nick Frost.

Doctor Who – Dark Water & Death In Heaven Review: Final Thoughts

You could argue that the resolution of this episode is slightly anticlimactic, but when you build up a threat as big as the one in this story, I suppose it was always going to be.

So I don’t consider that a problem.

Indeed, I thought this was a fine story, and one of the best finales to a Doctor Who season in a long time.

The absolute best? No, probably not. Bad Wolf & The Parting of the Ways and The Stolen Earth & Journey’s End probably pip this, mainly because the emotional impact centred around characters bigger and better than Danny Pink, but it was still very good.

Even the Cybermen were used well, and that’s saying something.

Roll on Christmas, I look forward to seeing what happens next.

Peter Capaldi’s First Season: Final Thoughts

So there you go, a season with 11 stories and only two of them were what I would consider to be poor.

The Best Doctor. No Question

The Best Doctor. No Question

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again; Steven Moffat has turned things around and has done a great job this year.

But what of the star of the show?

I think I speak for almost everyone – because there are bound to be some people out there who disagree – when I say that Peter Capaldi has been nothing short of excellent.

Playing a different kind of Doctor than we’ve ever seen, he’s been a breath of fresh air for the show.

I’ll lay my cards on the table now and say it; based upon these performances, Peter Capaldi is the best Doctor.

And as I write this and prepare to release my second Stuart Reviews Doctor Who book, I think it’s superb that we’re in a situation now where 51 years into the show’s existence, it’s got its best ever leading man in the title role.

Will his stories make him the highest rated in terms of that? You’ll have to read my rankings to find that out. But even if they don’t; even if there are Doctors out there whose stories are more consistently high on my list, that doesn’t change the notion in my eyes that he’s the best one we’ve ever had.

Long may he reign.

Keep Following the Blog

So for a lot of you, this’ll probably be the last time you visit the blog before Christmas, but I’d urge you to stick around and either like this on Facebook (on the tab on the right) or follow me on Twitter @sgmilne.

Like & Retweet The Article

If you enjoyed this article, please like and share it on social media

Buy The Book

Remember that my complete reviews of the classic series can be found  on Amazon. But it today.

Look Out For the New Book

Finally, with this season coming to an end, I’ll shortly be releasing my second book, which will contain all the reviews from Rose to Death In Heaven. It’ll also include my rankings of every Dr Who story from the start.


Stuart’s Movie Catchup: Death Wish and Death Wish 2

November 8, 2014

Here’s a movie I’ve always thought about watching – and often reference in jokes seeing as its embedded in popular culture – and yet have never bothered to give it a try.

But such was the level of mindless enjoyment that I got from watching the first one, I actually ended up watching both Death Wish and its 1982 sequel, Death Wish 2.

Death Wish Review: What’s This One About?

A mild-mannered architect turns badass vigilante when his wife is murdered and his daughter is brutally raped by Jeff Goldblum and his pals.

Death Wish 2 Review: And What About This One?

The same mild-mannered architect turns badass vigilante when both his housekeeper and his daughter are brutally raped and murdered; this time by Laurence Fishburne and his chums.

Have They Held Up Well?

Obviously not from a creative standpoint.

Sure, there aren’t any special effects to consider, but at the same time, we’re talking about 1974 New York and 1982 Los Angeles. Those places and times have not aged well.deathwish

And the music is very much of its time too, and that’s not a good thing.

But from a writing and directorial direction, it’s perfectly acceptable. Indeed, the rape scenes are actually more graphic than you would imagine from that era.

And Are They Any Good?

The first film is mindlessly brilliant.

Charles Bronson is one of these actors who you are slightly amazed exists; he delivers all of his lines in a stunted, hammy way and he’s got the face of a haggard Mexican burrito vendor, and yet against all the odds, he’s a leading man in Hollywood.

But I think that makes him more endearing. You kinda think “Aw, well done you for getting the part”.

He also, in spite of his flaws, has a serious badass vibe going. He’s the quiet killer you don’t mess with.

As a story, the first one is remarkably good – even though the middle act is simply Bronson going out and murdering random people for kicks – and it has a logical and acceptable ending.

The second one isn’t nearly as well written, but still quite fun.

Beyond the setup, it wasn’t in the same league as the first, and you’ve got to imagine that the next three films would be increasingly more silly, offering diminishing marginal returns.

Having said that though, I did read that Death Wish 3 – shown below – is one of the most unintentionally hilarious movies of all time, so I’ll definitely give it a go.

Ultimately, if all you want is to see a dodgy actor kill muggers and be portrayed as a hero for doing so, then this is well worth your time and will give you a good laugh.

Indeed, Death Wish as a whole can probably be summed up by this video…

Awesome.

My Other Catchup Reviews So Far

Alien
Jaws
Robocop
The Terminator
Tron

Like & Share On Social Media

If you liked this review, why not share it on Facebook and Twitter?

And click like on the Facebook sidebar here

Get the message out there folks :-)


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,425 other followers