Abbigail Bush
what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.
Aiden Melton
The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.
Mathilde the Guild
Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.
Michael Ledo
Jack Brooks (Trevor Matthews) witnessed the murder of his family by a morlock looking monster as a child and ran away. Since then he has had anger management issues which provides us with much of the comedy aspect of the film. Part of his counseling is to take a chemistry night class with Professor Gordon Crowley (Robert Englund) along with his girlfriend Eve (Rachel Skarsten) who he mostly ignores.Crowley lives in the house on top of Watson Road which has a history. The plot, isn't too hard to figure out, but basically there is just one real monster battle, although there are a number of them he has to fight, I was expecting something different. From the title I expect some kind of Dylan Dog type of film. It was not. The film leaves off for a sequel that never came.Guide: F-word. No sex or nudity. Monster horror/killing. Blood
ctbrown06
I really liked this movie simply because I identified and loved the Jack Brooks character so much. The purpose of the movie is to show a regular guy who is frustrated with the world around him trying to find his niche. What's so entertaining and hilarious is watching Jack blow in situations we all would like to blow up in while earnestly trying to trying to fit in and be normal.I think this movie has a very strong Canadian sensibility which some Americans just don't see the humor in. I'm reminded a lot of Trailer Park Boys, which I personally find hilarious, but understandably some people just don't get. This kind of material is funny if you find the humor in lower/lower middle class life and the types of struggles you have to deal with when you belong to those classes. This movie isn't a mindless slaughter-fest but instead focuses on the human element with humor and heart. If you enjoyed films like Shaun of the Dead that uses the horror genre as a backdrop to help bring out humorous yet relatable human struggles into focus then you'll like Jack Brooks. If your looking for a non-stop deluge of blood and a forgettable human characters whose only purpose is to be slaughtered then I suggest you look elsewhere.
GoreWhoreAust
Its taken awhile to get around to this one, led by positive reaction on pretty much every horror site during Jack Brooks' festival circuit run. For the most part the positive reactions were valid. The film has a lot that many zero budget horror offerings don't. Most impressive, and most important of all in my opinion, is that the film looks good. It's well shot, not too much hand-held, dynamic framing and good light/dark contrast in the many night time scenes. The acting, dodgy at best even in studio horror fare, is pretty good here, the stand out being of course Trevor Matthews as the titular Jack Brooks. That's saying a lot considering Matthews in a stuntman by trade and though he is put through his paces on the physical front, there are a number of scenes where Matthews elicits genuine empathy for Jack. While its always nice to see horror veterans like Robert Englund working, he hams it up alittle too much, and its especially noticeable in scenes with the 'playing-it-straight' Matthews. Actually, there's a very curious scene that involves the two actors that is played so dead pan, I'm still not sure If I was reading it right. It involves a lot of talk of Jack coming around to 'unblock' the professor's (Englund) pipes. I read homoerotic, but you be the judge. The all important FX in Jack Brooks is also handled very well, when not in tight close-up. It is here the film's inspirations are laid bare, Evil Dead II and Peter Jackson's Brain Dead, to an almost blinding degree, but director Knautz can be forgiven for this indulgence as he has his fun with such glowing reverence. However, all the above doesn't not a cult classic make. Jack Brooks is a one note, one idea story stretched out to nearly 90 minutes. It should be half that. We really only get to the good stuff in the last half an hour. It really feels like many scenes are just padding, especially those with Jack's anger management councilor and all the classroom scenes with Englund. This excess of scenes over states minor story and character developments making everything more predictable and in turn the viewer more impatient to get to there foregone conclusion. While it really should have been a short film (though I know they would have never got the funding for it) the filmmakers behind Jack Brooks should still be proud, as the elements that do work, work well.
Noel Barton
Upon first hearing of this movie I though it sounded like a lot of fun. Plumber Jack Brooks (Trevor Matthews) has anger and violence problems. He saw his family killed by a monster when he was a kid and "ran away like a pussy." He's visiting a therapist but it's not helping much.In his spare time he attends a science class with his shallow earache of a girlfriend. Professor Gordon Crowley (Robert Englund) runs the class and asks Jack to check his water pipes at his home. Through a few weak plot devices this leads to silly looking monsters on the rampage.Where the film works is extremely strong characters for this genre. The exception is a new love interest who is severely underdeveloped. However, due to the extensive time allocated to developing the other characters, the short running time makes the climatic action seem a little rushed. The movie could have benefited from being slightly longer with more varied monsters but does contain a reasonable helping of gross monster slaying.A big mistake made was to show the best looking monster at the beginning. It's shown again right at the end as Jack goes to fight it, and then disappointingly the credits roll! In these credits it's revealed that the same actor played both. However, I strongly suspect that's not why they didn't fight; the reason being budget restraints.To bookend a movie with the best looking monster is most likely attempting to create the illusion of a bigger budget. However, not having the monster involved in the plot or fighting the hero seems like an invitation for disappointment. That being said any fans of comedy horror B-movies would be foolish not to check this out.
