petegallows
Joined Nov 2021
Welcome to the new profile
We're still working on updating some profile features. To see the badges, ratings breakdowns, and polls for this profile, please go to the previous version.
Reviews54
petegallows's rating
...at least keep the noise down.
This is literally one of the films, I would watch to the end under these circumstances only: you put a gun to my head, you hold my family member hostage, you pay me a lot of money (hey, I like this option much better than the rest, hit me up - start a GFM for a few hundred thousand $ and I'll give it another shot), you end a war (also pretty good). At the moment, I can't think of other reasons.
I've watched probably thousands of horror and "horror" films over the decades, as I watch at least one, but probably around 3 every week, some I've seen many times, some I just barely watched the one time. Even the most low budget films usually have at least something. At least it's funny, how badly it's done, or something.
This one I've attempted in 2005, and again yesterday.
The corniest behaviours, the ciggy, the pathetic bad boy attitude (like the redhead guy from csi, or whatever the show is, that pulls down his shades - that's the level of corniness), the useless characters, that add absolutely nothing, the lowest rent special effect demons - just put a guy there, who looks menacing and says "I am demon" (or he can have a "demon" name tag on his shirt? Still more believable and scary, than anything in this film, instead of the "swarm of cockroaches demon", or whatever that was supposed to be.
I get, that there's Keanu Reeves fanboys and fangirls, good for you. Apparently, he's a good guy in real life - which is fantastic..but this film is still lame. I get, that there's comic book fans, but this was "meh"-er, than the "meh"-est episode of Supernatural, and I've seen all of them..and there were some pretty meh episodes there.
The hell effects were well done. That's the only reason, why it doesn't get 1*, but 2.
This is literally one of the films, I would watch to the end under these circumstances only: you put a gun to my head, you hold my family member hostage, you pay me a lot of money (hey, I like this option much better than the rest, hit me up - start a GFM for a few hundred thousand $ and I'll give it another shot), you end a war (also pretty good). At the moment, I can't think of other reasons.
I've watched probably thousands of horror and "horror" films over the decades, as I watch at least one, but probably around 3 every week, some I've seen many times, some I just barely watched the one time. Even the most low budget films usually have at least something. At least it's funny, how badly it's done, or something.
This one I've attempted in 2005, and again yesterday.
The corniest behaviours, the ciggy, the pathetic bad boy attitude (like the redhead guy from csi, or whatever the show is, that pulls down his shades - that's the level of corniness), the useless characters, that add absolutely nothing, the lowest rent special effect demons - just put a guy there, who looks menacing and says "I am demon" (or he can have a "demon" name tag on his shirt? Still more believable and scary, than anything in this film, instead of the "swarm of cockroaches demon", or whatever that was supposed to be.
I get, that there's Keanu Reeves fanboys and fangirls, good for you. Apparently, he's a good guy in real life - which is fantastic..but this film is still lame. I get, that there's comic book fans, but this was "meh"-er, than the "meh"-est episode of Supernatural, and I've seen all of them..and there were some pretty meh episodes there.
The hell effects were well done. That's the only reason, why it doesn't get 1*, but 2.
Fargo, great film. Would watch anytime. The Big Lebowsky, detto, No Country for old men - wow, what a film.
But this thing..Oh, brother.. I can't say this is one of the worst films, I've ever seen, because I couldn't possibly finish it, but those about 40 minutes I've tried to pay attention, I will never get back. It's one of the films, you'd have to literally pay me, or hold my family hostage, for me to continue watching.
The good out of the way - the music/singing was nice. OK, and since I go to every vintage car show in the area, the old cars looked nice too. That's it.
The storyline is silly, the dialogues, behaviour, the situations they find themselves in, are ridiculous - but not in a good, funny way. Absurd and ridiculous comedies can be very funny - this was not.
(For example Monty Python's Life of Brian - when Brian fell off the tower and landed into an alien spaceship - that just happened to be passing by that very moment, now that was obviously absurd (as you'd expect), but hilarious. To me anyway. For somebody else, Monty Python's might be 1/10.)
I wholeheartedly believe, although I will get thumbs down for this, whoever claims they actually like this film, they're just pretending. There's no way..
I've seen some horrible films over the decades, but even they had some redeeming quality, other than music..and cars.
The way they escaped, the way the ran in the beginning..the way they...escaped again, after the sheriff randomly decided to burn somebody's private property to the ground (??), for no reason, instead of just arresting them, how the guy's cousin's son saved them, how they somehow stole another car, picked up the musician, recorded a song on the way, as if it was nothing, without any practising, in one take (maybe Coen brothers said to themselves, "hey, if we can just pull this film out of our a 5 5, without any thought whatsoever, maybe these prisoner guys could record a song the same way" - the difference is, the song was performed very well..by whoever performed it..), ditched the musician somehow - did they show this? Maybe I slept through, so who knows...- met a crazy bank robber, sirens, john goodman guy...an average Dukes of Hazzard episode, which is otherwise just just lazy, easy watching, when you're nodding off, is top notch comedy and film making, compare to this film.
But this thing..Oh, brother.. I can't say this is one of the worst films, I've ever seen, because I couldn't possibly finish it, but those about 40 minutes I've tried to pay attention, I will never get back. It's one of the films, you'd have to literally pay me, or hold my family hostage, for me to continue watching.
The good out of the way - the music/singing was nice. OK, and since I go to every vintage car show in the area, the old cars looked nice too. That's it.
The storyline is silly, the dialogues, behaviour, the situations they find themselves in, are ridiculous - but not in a good, funny way. Absurd and ridiculous comedies can be very funny - this was not.
(For example Monty Python's Life of Brian - when Brian fell off the tower and landed into an alien spaceship - that just happened to be passing by that very moment, now that was obviously absurd (as you'd expect), but hilarious. To me anyway. For somebody else, Monty Python's might be 1/10.)
I wholeheartedly believe, although I will get thumbs down for this, whoever claims they actually like this film, they're just pretending. There's no way..
I've seen some horrible films over the decades, but even they had some redeeming quality, other than music..and cars.
The way they escaped, the way the ran in the beginning..the way they...escaped again, after the sheriff randomly decided to burn somebody's private property to the ground (??), for no reason, instead of just arresting them, how the guy's cousin's son saved them, how they somehow stole another car, picked up the musician, recorded a song on the way, as if it was nothing, without any practising, in one take (maybe Coen brothers said to themselves, "hey, if we can just pull this film out of our a 5 5, without any thought whatsoever, maybe these prisoner guys could record a song the same way" - the difference is, the song was performed very well..by whoever performed it..), ditched the musician somehow - did they show this? Maybe I slept through, so who knows...- met a crazy bank robber, sirens, john goodman guy...an average Dukes of Hazzard episode, which is otherwise just just lazy, easy watching, when you're nodding off, is top notch comedy and film making, compare to this film.
...but as a biopic, as always - why do they always feel the need to reinvent the story? If the story was interesting enough to make a film about it to begin with, stick to the story!
If it was just a film, I would probably score it higher...or would I actually score it lower, just because the story is so unrealistic - and that's the thing. It's a true story, for the most part. Just very, very unbelievable. Life is often weirder/more interesting than fiction.
The good - the film did have that 70s and 80s feel and atmosphere. The story is so obscure, most people around the world would have no idea about the background, or the people in it - except for old time wrestling fans and people who listen to Jim Cornette, or similar wrestling podcasts (there are no similar wrestling podcasts to Jim Cornette..) or Vice documentaries. This makes it pretty "brave", making a big budget film about a family, that people outside of the US - that are into this sort of thing, wouldn't normally know, or care about one bit.
It was done well, the acting was good for the most part. It did show the gritty life of pro wrestling, the mentality, the messed up mind of Fritz and it almost made you believe in the Von Erich Family curse. Maybe Kevin is the only one that isn't cursed? Or maybe his curse is that he's the only one that has to live, without all his brothers? Maybe the curse is real after all.
The in ring action was well done, Chavo Guerrero Jr looked great, I had no idea he was supposed to be in it, he looked decades younger than he is.
The scene, where the brothers meet in the afterlife was actually pretty heart warming.
The bad - they didn't stick to the "script" = life. They totally left out the youngest son. Fritz didn't like him (if he was naming and ranking his favourite sons, as he would, Chris would probably come up at number onehundredandtwentythousand..after going through the phonebook).. because Chris was way too small and didn't make a good wrestler...so the film-makers just left him out completely as well.
Poor Chris took his misfortune very hard and took his life as well, he probably is indeed cursed, even after his death, since there was no space in this big budget (lisp) "major motion picture" for his little self at all. Maybe they didn't want to spam the film with so much ache and so many suicides, but hey - it happened! Fritz also offed himself and I don't believe it was mentioned either.
Zac was buff af in this film, he did very well, but he also looked way too old and both him and the Kerry guy looked way too small/short. I fault the camera work for this, it is not the first time a shorter actor played a part of a tall person, but this is probably the first film I've ever seen, where it was blatantly obvious.
Let's say you couldn't tell in the ring, you could, but let's say you just didn't know, because you don't know how tall the other guys are supposed to be. But among normal people, general public, a wedding?
I was schocked when I found out Joaquin Phoenix was 5'8" after watching him play Johnny Cash in I walk the line. I assumed he must be 6'2", he just looked tall in the film to me - that's how you do it. That's what film making (and wrestling) is supposed to be about - suspend your disbelief. The Iron Claw failed miserably in this particular aspect.
Ric Flair's loud, incoherent, slobbering and lisping rambling is hard to emulate - I get it, but the guy totally failed though. He looked good, looked better physically than Ric ever did, but they should have had the vocal track dubbed by some of the very few people, who can actually commit to it and do it properly. Ric Flair himself would probably ask for a billion $ to do the voice himself (and of course he's like 700 years old at this point), but maybe Jay Lethal could have done it? Because this actor was so bland compared to Ric, if Ric was anything like this as a performer, he would only be able to afford one second hand alligator shoe..over his lifetime. Nobody would watch that. Nobody would ever buy into his character. If you can't use the actual footage of the promo, or do a voice-over by someone like Jay Lethal...maybe just leave it out altogether?
Lance von Erich was a big fiasco for Von Erichs, that was also omitted - he was not mentioned at all, "he" was only shown in the ring for a few brief seconds. Apparently Lance scenes (played by MJF) didn't make the cut. Bit of a shame.
*******
For the people unfamiliar with the story, this film could provide an interesting insight into the lives of one wrestling family, and let them peek behind the curtain a bit, or just provide some entertainment for a couple of hours.
For people who follow the behind the scenes of pro wrestling - The Iron Claw was well made, wasn't embarrassing like many other depictions of pro wrestling in film or on tv (like Jesse Ventura story, oh poor Jesse..), the film even did justice to some aspects of the business, but it was also a bit of a let down, having so many crucial historical inaccuracies in it. Overall, the film is better than I expected.
If it was just a film, I would probably score it higher...or would I actually score it lower, just because the story is so unrealistic - and that's the thing. It's a true story, for the most part. Just very, very unbelievable. Life is often weirder/more interesting than fiction.
The good - the film did have that 70s and 80s feel and atmosphere. The story is so obscure, most people around the world would have no idea about the background, or the people in it - except for old time wrestling fans and people who listen to Jim Cornette, or similar wrestling podcasts (there are no similar wrestling podcasts to Jim Cornette..) or Vice documentaries. This makes it pretty "brave", making a big budget film about a family, that people outside of the US - that are into this sort of thing, wouldn't normally know, or care about one bit.
It was done well, the acting was good for the most part. It did show the gritty life of pro wrestling, the mentality, the messed up mind of Fritz and it almost made you believe in the Von Erich Family curse. Maybe Kevin is the only one that isn't cursed? Or maybe his curse is that he's the only one that has to live, without all his brothers? Maybe the curse is real after all.
The in ring action was well done, Chavo Guerrero Jr looked great, I had no idea he was supposed to be in it, he looked decades younger than he is.
The scene, where the brothers meet in the afterlife was actually pretty heart warming.
The bad - they didn't stick to the "script" = life. They totally left out the youngest son. Fritz didn't like him (if he was naming and ranking his favourite sons, as he would, Chris would probably come up at number onehundredandtwentythousand..after going through the phonebook).. because Chris was way too small and didn't make a good wrestler...so the film-makers just left him out completely as well.
Poor Chris took his misfortune very hard and took his life as well, he probably is indeed cursed, even after his death, since there was no space in this big budget (lisp) "major motion picture" for his little self at all. Maybe they didn't want to spam the film with so much ache and so many suicides, but hey - it happened! Fritz also offed himself and I don't believe it was mentioned either.
Zac was buff af in this film, he did very well, but he also looked way too old and both him and the Kerry guy looked way too small/short. I fault the camera work for this, it is not the first time a shorter actor played a part of a tall person, but this is probably the first film I've ever seen, where it was blatantly obvious.
Let's say you couldn't tell in the ring, you could, but let's say you just didn't know, because you don't know how tall the other guys are supposed to be. But among normal people, general public, a wedding?
I was schocked when I found out Joaquin Phoenix was 5'8" after watching him play Johnny Cash in I walk the line. I assumed he must be 6'2", he just looked tall in the film to me - that's how you do it. That's what film making (and wrestling) is supposed to be about - suspend your disbelief. The Iron Claw failed miserably in this particular aspect.
Ric Flair's loud, incoherent, slobbering and lisping rambling is hard to emulate - I get it, but the guy totally failed though. He looked good, looked better physically than Ric ever did, but they should have had the vocal track dubbed by some of the very few people, who can actually commit to it and do it properly. Ric Flair himself would probably ask for a billion $ to do the voice himself (and of course he's like 700 years old at this point), but maybe Jay Lethal could have done it? Because this actor was so bland compared to Ric, if Ric was anything like this as a performer, he would only be able to afford one second hand alligator shoe..over his lifetime. Nobody would watch that. Nobody would ever buy into his character. If you can't use the actual footage of the promo, or do a voice-over by someone like Jay Lethal...maybe just leave it out altogether?
Lance von Erich was a big fiasco for Von Erichs, that was also omitted - he was not mentioned at all, "he" was only shown in the ring for a few brief seconds. Apparently Lance scenes (played by MJF) didn't make the cut. Bit of a shame.
*******
For the people unfamiliar with the story, this film could provide an interesting insight into the lives of one wrestling family, and let them peek behind the curtain a bit, or just provide some entertainment for a couple of hours.
For people who follow the behind the scenes of pro wrestling - The Iron Claw was well made, wasn't embarrassing like many other depictions of pro wrestling in film or on tv (like Jesse Ventura story, oh poor Jesse..), the film even did justice to some aspects of the business, but it was also a bit of a let down, having so many crucial historical inaccuracies in it. Overall, the film is better than I expected.