24 reviews
A deceitful sham
This movie was made with one purpose: to trick people into buying the DVD/blue-ray of "Jack the giant killer", only to be disappointed it isn't the blockbuster movie "Jack the giant slayer" they thought it was. There cannot have been any other reason or intention for making it because this movie is the very worst of utter crap. It really is just the stolen movie title filled with garbage. However, there is a story in there. It has actors, it has special effects, though extremely bad, appalling, awful. The movie has inconsistency written all over it. Nothing makes any sense, at all. The script, the acting, props, action scenes, - nothing measures up to any standard other than making a buck from stealing the title from a blockbuster by just throwing something together badly without much of a budget. The dinosaur cgi was half decent though. I cannot blame the actors for bad acting, when probably everything was shot in one take. There simply may have been no time or budget to re-do anything. Perhaps the actors were also lured into this sham, ignorant of it's true nature. There should be laws against this shameless deceit. On the other hand, some bad movies - because they were done badly, either for the lack of skill or on purpose - gain a cult status. This one will not.
Just to describe some major issues: Jack, an ordinary kid, is building/finishing some sort of battle robot as in "Avatar". The feet of the thing are shown several times walking on grass, in the opening scene. Clearly, it is just a couple of cardboard boxes with some spray paint. And he's building this thing for what reason? And with what means? No matter, he's got it working right in the nick of time, to kill the giant dinosaur in the end scene. Another delight is the flying castle. The "engine room" is nothing but an old smith's forge with forging tools hanging on the wall. The beans don't add up. Jack receives two beans. Which he throws away into a field (and grow into a beanstalk). Later, his stepsister finds another bean in Jack's jacket, and plants that one. At the very end of the movie, Jack manages to find another one of those beans in his pocket. Even if he threw away only one bean and inconsistently put the other in his pocket, still one extra bean has magically appeared somehow.
As mentioned in the other reviews, the time setting is inconsistent - old cameras and modern helicopters. Well the list is really endless. My conclusion is, that if you have ocd and enjoy counting goof-ups, you might like this movie a lot. Also it might be fun, to try to explain all the apparent inconsistencies.
Just to describe some major issues: Jack, an ordinary kid, is building/finishing some sort of battle robot as in "Avatar". The feet of the thing are shown several times walking on grass, in the opening scene. Clearly, it is just a couple of cardboard boxes with some spray paint. And he's building this thing for what reason? And with what means? No matter, he's got it working right in the nick of time, to kill the giant dinosaur in the end scene. Another delight is the flying castle. The "engine room" is nothing but an old smith's forge with forging tools hanging on the wall. The beans don't add up. Jack receives two beans. Which he throws away into a field (and grow into a beanstalk). Later, his stepsister finds another bean in Jack's jacket, and plants that one. At the very end of the movie, Jack manages to find another one of those beans in his pocket. Even if he threw away only one bean and inconsistently put the other in his pocket, still one extra bean has magically appeared somehow.
As mentioned in the other reviews, the time setting is inconsistent - old cameras and modern helicopters. Well the list is really endless. My conclusion is, that if you have ocd and enjoy counting goof-ups, you might like this movie a lot. Also it might be fun, to try to explain all the apparent inconsistencies.
- beef-638-121436
- Mar 20, 2013
- Permalink
Did someone buy a job lot of mismatched costumes and props?
While "The Ass-ylum" has become synonymous with poor quality film making and "Mockbusters" they really have plumbed the depths of crassness with this latest offering, their take on the "Jack and the beanstalk" story...
If you consider turning bad movies into drinking games please leave this one alone, you will be blind drunk before you get half way through this shambolic garbage...
What time period is this set in? You have modern helicopters and yet the police where Georgian uniforms, the army wear Dad's Army uniform cast offs and the absolute mismatch of props (Old Browning Camera Antiques et al) looks like they bought any old TAT from car boot sales in order to get props for this carbuncular waste of celluloid...
These people cannot even blame budget as an excuse, plenty of film makers have made much better and more entertaining movies with barely anything and as for the uniform gaffs fancy dress shops will hire out more convincing police uniforms...
As for the acting quality the amateur dramatic society known as "The Ass-ylum" somehow managed to cajole Ben Cross (Who in his time has done some real stinkers) into taking part in this debacle, I can only think that the negatives will be in the post Ben because I can only imagine that blackmail forced you into taking part in this monumentally bad garbage (I am sure your work on Banshee pays the bills)...
The rest of the cast are so cartoon like in their acting (Not that the cajoled Ben Cross is any better) that I have trouble wondering how the hell they got their "Equity Cards" to perform this steaming pile, maybe they are now handing out equity cards in cereal packets now?
If you consider turning bad movies into drinking games please leave this one alone, you will be blind drunk before you get half way through this shambolic garbage...
What time period is this set in? You have modern helicopters and yet the police where Georgian uniforms, the army wear Dad's Army uniform cast offs and the absolute mismatch of props (Old Browning Camera Antiques et al) looks like they bought any old TAT from car boot sales in order to get props for this carbuncular waste of celluloid...
These people cannot even blame budget as an excuse, plenty of film makers have made much better and more entertaining movies with barely anything and as for the uniform gaffs fancy dress shops will hire out more convincing police uniforms...
As for the acting quality the amateur dramatic society known as "The Ass-ylum" somehow managed to cajole Ben Cross (Who in his time has done some real stinkers) into taking part in this debacle, I can only think that the negatives will be in the post Ben because I can only imagine that blackmail forced you into taking part in this monumentally bad garbage (I am sure your work on Banshee pays the bills)...
The rest of the cast are so cartoon like in their acting (Not that the cajoled Ben Cross is any better) that I have trouble wondering how the hell they got their "Equity Cards" to perform this steaming pile, maybe they are now handing out equity cards in cereal packets now?
So bad it's good ?
Nope, it is not that good either.
The worst acting, SFX, story and overall film I have ever seen.
As others have said there is no actual time frame that it sits in, I was thinking 1950's but the uniforms and cars are wrong.
I don't know how much it cost to make but sometimes giving to charity is the right thing to do.
I just don't get it at all, there are no giants in it or did I miss them, there are dinosaurs though that people ride. When I say ride, the main villain if she can be called that was apparently riding a dinosaur at certain points (I say apparently because we only see her riding "Something", she looked like she enjoyed it anyway no matter what it was, which is nice).
The worst acting, SFX, story and overall film I have ever seen.
As others have said there is no actual time frame that it sits in, I was thinking 1950's but the uniforms and cars are wrong.
I don't know how much it cost to make but sometimes giving to charity is the right thing to do.
I just don't get it at all, there are no giants in it or did I miss them, there are dinosaurs though that people ride. When I say ride, the main villain if she can be called that was apparently riding a dinosaur at certain points (I say apparently because we only see her riding "Something", she looked like she enjoyed it anyway no matter what it was, which is nice).
- neildowdall
- Apr 1, 2013
- Permalink
Utter Garbage From Start To Finish
What a sad state of affairs when Asylum (the makers of this sad little tale) throws out garbage like this with a cast of people who aren't even trained in the art of acting. Wow, they must have taken the directors wife and kid hostage to make him do it. One consolation, this film of inferior quality should only have taken a couple of weeks to throw together so no real harm done.
The story starts of with some Real Steal rip off material as Jack is fixing his robot (I know, lol...I don't remember Aliens style robots in any other version of Jack...Beanstalk before!) while struggling to say his lines and use his hands at the same time. lol yes, I remembered a classic bit of acting when we first see the ridiculous beanstalk in a field. There is a cop standing there with a very small crowd of people and he's right in front of them saying "nothing to see here, move along", I was like WTF! Nothing to see? Also the way he was holding this crowd of 4 people back was stupid. They are in a field and can stand anywhere but chose to all squeeze in front of the only cop there. Another thing is, when Jack gets nabbed by the tree branch thing and gets taken up in front of everyone. Not one person seems to notice it happening!! Garbage, garbage, garbage.
I don't do the "this is the worst film ever" speech because it's cliché and rarely true. I have to say though, it's damn close. The acting is atrocious, the editing looks like it was done by a crack addict badly needing a fix and the music, the mf'king music! Where in the hell did they dig it up from? It sounded a bit like those,(I'm not too sure of the name) Stylaphone? Is that the thing Rolf Harris used to advertise? Well, it sounded like that.
Not a film to be watched, even if your bored, drunk, high, low...in fact...just don't watch it. I did and I'm still queasy.
The story starts of with some Real Steal rip off material as Jack is fixing his robot (I know, lol...I don't remember Aliens style robots in any other version of Jack...Beanstalk before!) while struggling to say his lines and use his hands at the same time. lol yes, I remembered a classic bit of acting when we first see the ridiculous beanstalk in a field. There is a cop standing there with a very small crowd of people and he's right in front of them saying "nothing to see here, move along", I was like WTF! Nothing to see? Also the way he was holding this crowd of 4 people back was stupid. They are in a field and can stand anywhere but chose to all squeeze in front of the only cop there. Another thing is, when Jack gets nabbed by the tree branch thing and gets taken up in front of everyone. Not one person seems to notice it happening!! Garbage, garbage, garbage.
I don't do the "this is the worst film ever" speech because it's cliché and rarely true. I have to say though, it's damn close. The acting is atrocious, the editing looks like it was done by a crack addict badly needing a fix and the music, the mf'king music! Where in the hell did they dig it up from? It sounded a bit like those,(I'm not too sure of the name) Stylaphone? Is that the thing Rolf Harris used to advertise? Well, it sounded like that.
Not a film to be watched, even if your bored, drunk, high, low...in fact...just don't watch it. I did and I'm still queasy.
- parodyreviews
- Mar 17, 2013
- Permalink
I love cheesy movies, but this was downright awful!
Where do I start? Some movies ARE so bad they're good. I love cheesy movies and was in stitches for most of such classics as 'Killer Clowns from Outer Space', Megashark vs Giant Octopus', and 'Robot Jox'. This I did not love. It was annoying. I'm just not entirely sure why this was simply bad and not cheesy.
Awful acting, Awful plot (in fact, practically none), poor casting, poor direction, bad special effects. Actually, they weren't ALL bad - maybe the production was taken over seriously. Nope, that can't be it as it's already been pointed out the costumes and props were from entirely different time periods (CCTV cameras on walls anyone?)
I think it was simply a lack of care about any single part of the filmmaking process. It's like someone just stood in the street, shouted 'Who wants to make a film that's very loosely based on Jack and the Beanstalk', and the least interested people within earshot all inexplicably volunteered.
Don't watch this film (unless you're imminently dying and have nothing better to do when I guess it might actually make your remaining time feel longer)
Awful acting, Awful plot (in fact, practically none), poor casting, poor direction, bad special effects. Actually, they weren't ALL bad - maybe the production was taken over seriously. Nope, that can't be it as it's already been pointed out the costumes and props were from entirely different time periods (CCTV cameras on walls anyone?)
I think it was simply a lack of care about any single part of the filmmaking process. It's like someone just stood in the street, shouted 'Who wants to make a film that's very loosely based on Jack and the Beanstalk', and the least interested people within earshot all inexplicably volunteered.
Don't watch this film (unless you're imminently dying and have nothing better to do when I guess it might actually make your remaining time feel longer)
- mbell-592-882640
- Apr 26, 2013
- Permalink
one of the worst movies since movie was invented
this movie would turn every atheist like me to rediscover religion. why? because when i watched it, i couldn't help repeatedly murmuring (actually cursing?) with lot of religious words that only the die-hard church goers would recite faithfully before and in front of every sentence: OMG....oh my god, Jesus...., oh, my lord....oh, lord of mercy...." these words i usually warned myself not to blur out under any circumstance, just wanted to enforce my disbelief of god or gods in plural form. what the bible, the preachers, the reverends or any religion pitching con artist failed to turn me around, this movie succeeded without any difficulty. omg (here's another one repeated helplessly), i rarely saw anything worse than this movie, jack the giant killer was not a giant killer but a metal junkyard welder. he welded a primitive horrible awkward manual robot in the barn and that crappy giant welded together junk could use its hand gun to burst hell fire. this film somehow also might get an Oscar for its naivety, its shallow original script and the worst and most terrible actors, the awkwardness simply surpasses any movie now playing on the screen. i rest my case.
- rightwingisevil
- May 16, 2013
- Permalink
The Asylum does it again...
Well, this movie was nothing at all what I had expected it to be. I had expected somewhat of a new interpretation of the classic tale of Jack and the bean stalk, but alas, that was not to be.
This is a story that borrows heavily from that story yes, but it does so in a very nonchalant way. It does however, pardon my French, manage to butcher up the entire story and try to put a weird, modern twist to it. But it just failed in every aspect.
The story ends up being a very broken apart set of fragments that doesn't really add up to a greater picture or unity. You just sit there wondering how this could come to be.
Mind you, that this is a The Asylum production, so that is a clear warning sign right there. I wasn't aware of that prior to obtaining the movie, and had I known, I wouldn't have wasted time or money on it. This is by far one of the more questionable movies from The Asylum that I have seen so far.
The CGI effects in the movie were quite bad, especially the big dinosaur-like creatures. They were just laughable. I will say that the floating brick building was actually quite nicely made, so thumbs up for that at least.
As for the acting, well there was nothing exceptional or mentionable here, and not even Ben Cross could manage to lift up anything in this particular movie.
This movie was definitely not meant for me as the audience, and it was a very strained ordeal to get through it. I ended up picking up my phone and playing some game during it as well, as I sort of lost interest in the storyline, which wasn't particularly solid to begin with, but I did manage to finish the movie. However, what would appeal to anyone in this movie is hard for me to put my finger upon; perhaps if you are a die-hard fan of anyone in the movie, but other than that, I just don't see the appeal.
This is a story that borrows heavily from that story yes, but it does so in a very nonchalant way. It does however, pardon my French, manage to butcher up the entire story and try to put a weird, modern twist to it. But it just failed in every aspect.
The story ends up being a very broken apart set of fragments that doesn't really add up to a greater picture or unity. You just sit there wondering how this could come to be.
Mind you, that this is a The Asylum production, so that is a clear warning sign right there. I wasn't aware of that prior to obtaining the movie, and had I known, I wouldn't have wasted time or money on it. This is by far one of the more questionable movies from The Asylum that I have seen so far.
The CGI effects in the movie were quite bad, especially the big dinosaur-like creatures. They were just laughable. I will say that the floating brick building was actually quite nicely made, so thumbs up for that at least.
As for the acting, well there was nothing exceptional or mentionable here, and not even Ben Cross could manage to lift up anything in this particular movie.
This movie was definitely not meant for me as the audience, and it was a very strained ordeal to get through it. I ended up picking up my phone and playing some game during it as well, as I sort of lost interest in the storyline, which wasn't particularly solid to begin with, but I did manage to finish the movie. However, what would appeal to anyone in this movie is hard for me to put my finger upon; perhaps if you are a die-hard fan of anyone in the movie, but other than that, I just don't see the appeal.
- paul_haakonsen
- May 3, 2013
- Permalink
Jack the Giant Killer but without any giants
While I hate most of the Asylum's movies with a passion, I keep watching because there is something somewhat entertaining about their awfulness and also there's a glimmer of hope that they'd do something halfway tolerable. The Asylum oddly enough have made a few tolerable movies though the best they get is only decent. Jack the Giant Killer is not the worst from them, but it is still really bad. It looks amateurish from a starting point. Watching the costumes, sets and props I didn't and still don't have a clue about what time period the movie was supposed to be set in, and the laughable special effects(especially with some of the worst dinosaur, seemingly poor and personality-less substitutes for giants, effects I've seen for any movie) and editing that looks that someone was having a drug hallucination are no better. The music sounds weird, is not memorable in the slightest and doesn't fit at all. The dialogue is stilted and often sounded like senseless babbling with the actors clearly struggling to get their words out, it also has a lot of cheese and this is when the murky sound is not drowning it out too much. The story, aside from it having a complete lack of originality and borrowing heavily from the likes of Jurassic Park and Aliens, is a structurally thin bore that doesn't make sense or have any charm, fun, wonder, thrills or heart. In my mind, the attempt to mix a Grimms fairytale-like atmosphere with a quasi-modern twist also didn't gel. The characters are annoying and never developed, they're just there for the sake of it. The acting is poor, Jamie Atkins badly under-performs to the point that his performance is lost amidst everything else. Ben Cross and Jane March(who actually gives the movie's best performance) fare better but are severely under-used so while they try hard their characters just don't register and they don't bring much particularly new to them either. To conclude, not The Asylum's worst but has nothing to recommend it apart from perhaps Jane March's beauty. 1/10 Bethany Cox
- TheLittleSongbird
- May 10, 2013
- Permalink
Awful
I knew it wasn't the Hollywood version. I saw it on Netflix and my daughter is in a 'giant' phase so thought to give it a try.
Dialogue is awful. Acting is awful. Army in charge guy is awful. Jack is awful. Costumes, props out of place. Cgi is awful. Decisions are illogical. Awful nonsense.
Basically, wannabe untalented actors starring in a film with no budget and a very poor script. Sure, why not and I hope they had fun but the end film is crap.
I've said all I needed to above and these extra lines are for padding to meet IMDBs review length requirement.
Dialogue is awful. Acting is awful. Army in charge guy is awful. Jack is awful. Costumes, props out of place. Cgi is awful. Decisions are illogical. Awful nonsense.
Basically, wannabe untalented actors starring in a film with no budget and a very poor script. Sure, why not and I hope they had fun but the end film is crap.
I've said all I needed to above and these extra lines are for padding to meet IMDBs review length requirement.
Jack the Giant Rip off
- Andrewatkins1981
- Jul 1, 2013
- Permalink
unintentionally funny
Firstly look at that poster... see that scary monster on the front with those massive teeth? Yeah? Not in the movie!
There are monsters, some the size of dinosaurs and one more like Godzilla in proportions, but they are all the same species, a sort of short tailed 6 eyed bull like reptile. The big one is the same CGI model but scaled up.
The acting / dialogue is stilted and funny. It has a delightful amateur- dramatics quality to it. And the guy playing the general is hamming it up to Monty Python standards. Nothing about this is remotely believable but as another reviewer noted, the floaty castle is quite nice. Though powered by a fire that looked barely strong enough to toast marshmallows on. The CGI - is very bad, very 90s. Probably someone with a copy of some 3D software offered to do it for free. The worst is the whip effects of the beanstalk.
Anyway I highly recommend you don't waste money on this - if you can watch it for free and make a drinking game or something silly out of it then you may have a better evening than I did.
There are monsters, some the size of dinosaurs and one more like Godzilla in proportions, but they are all the same species, a sort of short tailed 6 eyed bull like reptile. The big one is the same CGI model but scaled up.
The acting / dialogue is stilted and funny. It has a delightful amateur- dramatics quality to it. And the guy playing the general is hamming it up to Monty Python standards. Nothing about this is remotely believable but as another reviewer noted, the floaty castle is quite nice. Though powered by a fire that looked barely strong enough to toast marshmallows on. The CGI - is very bad, very 90s. Probably someone with a copy of some 3D software offered to do it for free. The worst is the whip effects of the beanstalk.
Anyway I highly recommend you don't waste money on this - if you can watch it for free and make a drinking game or something silly out of it then you may have a better evening than I did.
- martin-randle
- Mar 28, 2016
- Permalink
Excellent Fantasy Adventure
Jack the Giant Killer is one of Mark Atkins' finest achievements as a director and offers veteran star Ben Cross one of his best roles in years. This is arguably the most superb performance he has given since Chariots of Fire and will certainly please those who have followed his stunning career. The film is also a special effects extravaganza and benefits greatly from an excellent screenplay by the director himself. Location filming in England and some quite atmospheric cinematography provides a fitting look to the film, almost surrealistic and very powerfully disturbing. An exciting adventure in fantasy that never disappoints at any point in the story.
- dianerpessler-46164
- Jul 27, 2015
- Permalink
WANT TO TOUCH MY MAGIC BEANS?
- nogodnomasters
- May 9, 2019
- Permalink
Not the movie released in theaters
Honestly What Were They Thinking
I have to say what in the world where they thinking when they made this movie? i really don't know i mean i have never seen such awful garbage in my entire life, this movie is so pointless i just can't believe it it's like they had a budget of 10 dollars (yes I am exaggerating but I am sure if you've seen this you will agree.)well if you have seen this i feel bad for you and yes i feel bad for me the only reason i watched it was that I thought I was watching Jack The Giant Sayer which was loads better than this one so if you had some kind of misfortune and you ended up watching this then you should know just how awful it is and this wouldn't have made a difference even if i was drunk
- lxmerrifield
- Aug 18, 2013
- Permalink
I want the last hour of my life back.
Like other reviewers, I made the terrible mistake of watching this disaster of a movie.
The only actor that can carry a remotely believable dialogue is Ben Cross (Chariots Of Fire). The rest of the actors look like they are reading off a teleprompter.
The CGI is just as bad, or worse than any made for TV SCI-FI movie, and leaves me wondering how are movies like this profitable?
Please don't make the same painful mistake, watching this movie thinking it was Jack The Giant Slayer.
(Ben Cross is the only reason it deserves a 1/10)
The only actor that can carry a remotely believable dialogue is Ben Cross (Chariots Of Fire). The rest of the actors look like they are reading off a teleprompter.
The CGI is just as bad, or worse than any made for TV SCI-FI movie, and leaves me wondering how are movies like this profitable?
Please don't make the same painful mistake, watching this movie thinking it was Jack The Giant Slayer.
(Ben Cross is the only reason it deserves a 1/10)
- billypudoff
- Jun 2, 2013
- Permalink
If you're trying to watch every movie ever made, save this one for last, and if you're lucky, you'll die first.
This is not the movie your are looking for. You meant to look up Jack the Giant Slayer, released the same year. I thought maybe this was just a localization, like Americans wouldn't know the word "Slayer" or something. Nope.
This is the ripoff version, with actors you've never heard of, low budget special effects, cliché characters, an army that's comprised of 10 people, plot holes the size of a giant beanstalk and much much more.
Now I haven't watched the other one yet, but I can guarantee you it is better.
I couldn't even comprehend this movie, it just made no sense. You will ask "What the heck just happened?" at least 15 times during the movie.
It's not even bad in a funny way, just disappointing. Like you feel bad for the actors and artists who put effort into this movie. And I'm pretty sure the movie poster was designed by someone who didn't even watch it.
If you're looking for a fantasy movie, go watch Jack the Giant Slayer. If you're looking for a bad movie to laugh at, go watch the room. If you're trying to watch every movie ever made, save this one for last, and if you're lucky, you'll die first.
This is the ripoff version, with actors you've never heard of, low budget special effects, cliché characters, an army that's comprised of 10 people, plot holes the size of a giant beanstalk and much much more.
Now I haven't watched the other one yet, but I can guarantee you it is better.
I couldn't even comprehend this movie, it just made no sense. You will ask "What the heck just happened?" at least 15 times during the movie.
It's not even bad in a funny way, just disappointing. Like you feel bad for the actors and artists who put effort into this movie. And I'm pretty sure the movie poster was designed by someone who didn't even watch it.
If you're looking for a fantasy movie, go watch Jack the Giant Slayer. If you're looking for a bad movie to laugh at, go watch the room. If you're trying to watch every movie ever made, save this one for last, and if you're lucky, you'll die first.
Complete Waste of Time
This movie is yet another piece of cinematic garbage brought to you by none other than The Asylum, whose work is always lackluster, heavily dependent upon lame CGI special effects, and badly acted. Just imagine that the British TV series Primeval had a swingers party with Real Steel, Howl's Moving Castle, Benny Hill, and a WWII farce set in Britain. The plot is very loosely based on Jack and the Beanstalk and largely nonsensical.
The acting is atrocious despite there being two or three recognizable, moderately big-name British actors in the cast. I stopped actively watching the film about 10 minutes in and just listened to it until an action scene came along, then I watched until that scene was over. If you have other things to do, you won't really miss any plot points (ha, what plot?) by not paying full or even half attention to the movie.
Trust me, do not waste your time on this. You will not regret skipping it.
The acting is atrocious despite there being two or three recognizable, moderately big-name British actors in the cast. I stopped actively watching the film about 10 minutes in and just listened to it until an action scene came along, then I watched until that scene was over. If you have other things to do, you won't really miss any plot points (ha, what plot?) by not paying full or even half attention to the movie.
Trust me, do not waste your time on this. You will not regret skipping it.
- mariajonasfahlsing
- Apr 23, 2014
- Permalink
Everything's bad
- Leofwine_draca
- Apr 13, 2018
- Permalink
Crap the Movie Killer
Why did I watch this again? I think it is out of the dark corner of my mind, that same need to see a house fire or why the police have a building surrounded. I honestly wish I knew why I watched this movie. It is not like anyone paid me.
No one in this movie is anything close to resembling an actor. Vicki Glover had little to say, but when she did, it looked as if she was about to vomit. Then she would mumble something you couldn't hear or comprehend. Harry Dyer spouted out his lines, he seemed to question himself, constantly with a look of puzzlement on his face. Maybe he was wondering if there was going to be a paycheck or not. Jamie Atkins obviously slept with the director to land this role. Jamie is still inside the paper bag. Then they tossed in Ben Cross and Jane March. Who? The most "talented" movie extras they could find. Good thing there was no nudity or I would have to remove the one point from the movie I am forced to give them.
I don't rate the CGI in a film. But really they should have gone with a model village and wrestlers in rubber suits and that would have been better. The props look unbelievable and the one scale model of a cannon on a freight car is so tiny that the focal blur gives it away.
This movie was so bad, don't even jokingly give it above 2 stars. There is nothing to redeem this movie or the people who made it. Instead go watch a house fire down the block or stand out in the rain for two hours with a cardboard sign "This Space for Rent". Either one would be better than watching this movie.
No one in this movie is anything close to resembling an actor. Vicki Glover had little to say, but when she did, it looked as if she was about to vomit. Then she would mumble something you couldn't hear or comprehend. Harry Dyer spouted out his lines, he seemed to question himself, constantly with a look of puzzlement on his face. Maybe he was wondering if there was going to be a paycheck or not. Jamie Atkins obviously slept with the director to land this role. Jamie is still inside the paper bag. Then they tossed in Ben Cross and Jane March. Who? The most "talented" movie extras they could find. Good thing there was no nudity or I would have to remove the one point from the movie I am forced to give them.
I don't rate the CGI in a film. But really they should have gone with a model village and wrestlers in rubber suits and that would have been better. The props look unbelievable and the one scale model of a cannon on a freight car is so tiny that the focal blur gives it away.
This movie was so bad, don't even jokingly give it above 2 stars. There is nothing to redeem this movie or the people who made it. Instead go watch a house fire down the block or stand out in the rain for two hours with a cardboard sign "This Space for Rent". Either one would be better than watching this movie.
This film is not bad IF YOU GET what they are trying to do here...
- bahpofficer
- May 6, 2013
- Permalink
Low-budget knockoff of "Jack the Giant Slayer" is original enough to stand on its own
The Asylum's "Jack the Giant Killer" (2013) isn't a remake of the 1962 film, but rather a mockbuster for which the company is known. These kinds of movies are produced with the intention of exploiting the mass publicity machine of a blockbuster with a similar title or subject, in this case "Jack the Giant Slayer," which was released to theaters around the same time.
While both films feature a main character named Jack and massive beanstalks that lead up to an amazing realm above the clouds, they're otherwise totally different. This one doesn't even have giants, although they're mentioned. The "giants" here are prehistoric-like beasts that look like a cross between ankylosaurus, triceratops and an elephant, albeit the size of brontosaurs. Also, the story takes place in the present rather than some fantasy medieval period.
These Asylum flicks only cost between $1 million and $2 million, so I was surprised how well done some of the CGI is, like the flying castle and Serena's palace. Believe it or not, the "realm above the clouds" is actually superior to the one in the blockbuster "Jack the Giant Slayer" because this film uses actual locations rather than cartoonish CGI; and the locations are magnificent.
Both Jamie Atkins (Jack) and Harry Dyer (Newald) work well as the son/father protagonists. Ben Cross is also on hand. On the female front, Vicki Glover stands out as Lisa, but not enough is done with her. Jane March plays Serena (the evil queen or whatever) and she still looks good at almost 40 during shooting.
The first half of the movie is surprisingly good, but I was let down a bit by the conventional last act where the colossal beasts attack earth with too many reaction shots of the main characters. I would've preferred the script focusing on the people and the interesting dynamics thereof.
Yes, some Asylum movies suck, like "30,000 Leagues Under the Sea" and "Mega Piranha." But some don't, e.g. "The Land That Time Forgot" (2009), "6 Guns" and "Grimm's Snow White." This one may not make the latter list, but it could have if they spent a little more money to draw out the plot's potential. Nevertheless, it's not bad for fans of Grade B fantasy adventure flicks.
The film runs 1 hour, 27 minutes and was shot in England (Lancashire & Merseyside) and Wales, UK.
GRADE: C+/B-
While both films feature a main character named Jack and massive beanstalks that lead up to an amazing realm above the clouds, they're otherwise totally different. This one doesn't even have giants, although they're mentioned. The "giants" here are prehistoric-like beasts that look like a cross between ankylosaurus, triceratops and an elephant, albeit the size of brontosaurs. Also, the story takes place in the present rather than some fantasy medieval period.
These Asylum flicks only cost between $1 million and $2 million, so I was surprised how well done some of the CGI is, like the flying castle and Serena's palace. Believe it or not, the "realm above the clouds" is actually superior to the one in the blockbuster "Jack the Giant Slayer" because this film uses actual locations rather than cartoonish CGI; and the locations are magnificent.
Both Jamie Atkins (Jack) and Harry Dyer (Newald) work well as the son/father protagonists. Ben Cross is also on hand. On the female front, Vicki Glover stands out as Lisa, but not enough is done with her. Jane March plays Serena (the evil queen or whatever) and she still looks good at almost 40 during shooting.
The first half of the movie is surprisingly good, but I was let down a bit by the conventional last act where the colossal beasts attack earth with too many reaction shots of the main characters. I would've preferred the script focusing on the people and the interesting dynamics thereof.
Yes, some Asylum movies suck, like "30,000 Leagues Under the Sea" and "Mega Piranha." But some don't, e.g. "The Land That Time Forgot" (2009), "6 Guns" and "Grimm's Snow White." This one may not make the latter list, but it could have if they spent a little more money to draw out the plot's potential. Nevertheless, it's not bad for fans of Grade B fantasy adventure flicks.
The film runs 1 hour, 27 minutes and was shot in England (Lancashire & Merseyside) and Wales, UK.
GRADE: C+/B-
Jack destroys those whom oppose family values
All of asylum movies are perfect works of genius. This, Jack The Giant Killer, no exception. It is brilliant. I'm fortunate enough to watch if free on YouTube (not youporn not porntube-- YouTube!) and the computer I've currently borrowed (I'm broke...dog)...well its old and so there's a little image delay sound often too low to hear so I listen to BS cds in place of movie sound.... when I watch movies and videos online...anyway back to my review... Jack The Giant Killer is awesome. Deep psychology here. Surreal ideas. Great actress acting and actors too. DIALOG, dang hot if you ask moi. YOU HAVE TO SEE THIS! AND THEN WATCH Titanic 2. Its that good. Heavy. Far Out. My kinda deal. and yes i'm sober don't drink booze nor smoke pot nor take speed coke heroin nor psychadelics etc.-- that's why MY REVIEW is objective unlike others that diss this movie. (u should be ashamed)
- salesmandragonstouch
- May 4, 2016
- Permalink
One of the Greatest film master werks I have Ever seen . Oscar BUZZZ .
Move over Ben Hur ,get out of the way Star Wars , this movie will not can not be stopped .If you have read any Negative critique of this fan based fantastic movie throw them out of your mind. Call the kids call grandma and gather around the flat screen you just bought from wal mart's .cook up two not one bag of popcorn because you're going to want more of everything .Not even the game of thrones can hold a flicker of a candle to this GOD SEND of a movie bravo,bravo,bravo . Cheers to the writer,cheers to the editor,cheers for costume design, Hell even craft service should get a ring for the super bowl champ effort of the film . When I was just a ladd back in Ireland I would spend my days picking seashells by the seashore for Suzy Sutherman ... And dreaming of the day that i would have the good fortune to experience a film like this .. what a joy to watch i have seen it 12 times at this point . But i promise all the gods of ODEN that i will watch it once a week until the day that I I'm called to the big movie house in the sky .
- mikevonbach
- Apr 29, 2016
- Permalink