Ben Affleck as Batman

I am little bit late on this one. I didn't have change to write about this when it was announced that Ben Affleck will be Batman in Man of Steel sequel. Few days internet was full of raging people and Ben Affleck memes. Then Miley Cyrus came to help.

I don't have any problems Ben Affleck being Batman and I don't understand the reactions. Like Affleck being Batman is biggest issue of Man of Steel sequel. Like everything else is best thing ever. You don't see any problem Superman from Man of Steel fighting normal human and possibly losing. But you have problem when Ben Affleck being Batman. I don't understand that.

I honestly think he can be good Batman. We don't know what kind of Batman we get in that movie. Hollywood have trainers and medication to give actors enough muscles. I don't remember much about Daredevil where Affleck played Daredevil. I don't remember him being the problem in that movie. To me he look like he can be Batman. I don't remember him being good in any movie I have seen. He was the problem in Paycheck. But I don't think he will be the problem in Man of Steel sequel. That movie will have other problems. Main one being Batman in Man of Steel sequel. I already wrote post about that.

Drive Angry (2011)

SPOILER WARNING!!! This post spoils movie Drive Angry (2011).

I guess I have seen that one scene in Shoot 'Em Up. This time it was little longer and showed more. But it still was Shoot 'Em Up rip-off. This movie made me want to watch Shoot 'Em Up again. Good thing that I have that movie on Blu-Ray.

But back to this movie. I wanted to see some Crazy Cage. I don't remember seen him playing crazy characters that much. I guess I haven't seen correct movies. In movie's name is Drive Angry, it surely have some Crazy Cage. It didn't have. And it didn't have much of hell. What it had was over the top action, skin and fast cars. It had some of that 80's action movie feeling. I wish they hadn't use that much CGI. It ate impact of the movie. They should have toned down the supernatural aspect.

Cage has escaped from hell to save is his grand daughter. She is held by cult who wants to sacrifice her. Cage is followed by Accountant, who wants to take Cage back to hell. Cage picks up waitress Piper. They kill two cops and lot of cult members. That makes them fugitives. Accountant acts FBI agent and let Cage and Piper go through police blockade. We learn that cult had nothing to do with Satan even if they think they are satanic cult. Accountant tells Cage and Piper, that Satan doesn't like little children to be sacrificed in his name. That would make Satan angry. He wants Cage to kill the cult while he watches, but he want to have the Godkiller first. Godkiller is weapon, that can kill supernatural beings like Accountant.

After this all consistency and realism goes out of the window. Cage goes to cult's camp and starts one man killing show. He is unstoppable killing machine and no-one can stop him. Until there is only few cult members alive. Cult leader Jonah King among them. They manage to stop Cage. Piper takes Godkiller from Accountant and goes to help Cage. She shoots Godkiller once causing great damage. However recoil knocks her out. There is only King and Cage left. King beats Cage and tells him that mortal weapons can't kill him. Good thing that Godkiller was there and Cage shoots King with it. Until this point nothing indicated that King was supernatural being. He was shown as regular human who was cult leader. Accountant didn't know the cult or King. Why he was told to be supernatural at the end? That was totally unnecessary and didn't made any sense. It was like that was thrown there at last minute because someone thought that was great idea. It wasn't.

After King was killed, Cage give his grand daughter to Piper. She really is the best person to take care of baby. Early in the movie we learn that she is unemployed and can't keep her jobs. During the movie she became cop killer. With Cage and fake FBI agent Accountant gone, she is only one who can be blamed for killings. Cage tell that his friend will look after them. Earlier in the movie King told police that Cage and Piper where at that same friends farm or what ever it was. Police will surely come search Piper from there. I hate when movies make happy endings that doesn't make much sense when you start to think about them. This is not only one that does that.

The Avengers (1998)

SPOILER WARNING!!! This post spoils movie The Avengers (1998).

Everyone reviewed this just before Marvel's Avengers movie was released. I guess it was funny to review The Avengers before The Avengers was released. Everyone said this was bad movie. I don't agree with that. I liked this movie.

Yes, there is male agent named mother and female agent named father. Yes, Steed asked Mrs Peel to meet him in gentlemen's club, where women are not allowed for over hundred years. Yes, they drink tea all the time. Yes, there are teddy bear costumes. But this movie was meant to be campy like 60's Batman or Danger 5. Witty dialog turned most reviewers off. I liked it. I guess you have to like british movies and tv shows to like this movie. Or at least british humor.

It was refreshing to watch movie with witty dialog instead of cursing and shouting. Our heroes were so good that they didn't have to run most of the time. I was kind of disappointed when Steed run when Mrs Peel was kidnapped. After Mrs Peel escapes her kidnappers, we got my favourite scene of the movie. Steed and Mrs Peel kiss and in following witty dialog they discuss, how it was just scientific test to find out, if Mrs Peel was real Mrs Peel. You should find that scene from Youtube with movie's name and kiss. The dialog and acting are pure gold.

I really didn't understand villains plan. Why would you want to threat countries, if you could control the weather? You could get more money than you could ever spent, if you sold the weather. He even had company that sold weather. Didn't it make enough money? As soon as someone starts to threat countries with weather, everyone will be after him. By being legitimate business man, he could spend his money. Have holidays and visit other countries. But no. He had to rule the world. I have never got that. Why you would want to rule the world? In modern world it is better to be rich nobody than ruler of the world. Only time you gain something by becoming ruler of the world is, when there is tyrant ruling the world keeping the world in his tight control. In free world ruling the world doesn't make any sense.

I won't get to how unrealistic the weather controlling device was, because this movie didn't aim for realism. However I have to say that, who designed that thing, made huge mistake by placing controlling room at the bottom where it was so close to water that it almost drowned when waves got higher.

Timecop 2: The Berlin Decision (2003)

SPOILER WARNING!!! This post spoils movie Timecop 2: The Berlin Decision (2003).

This is straight to video sequel to Timecop. This happens 20 years after events of first movie and doesn't have any of the actors of the first movie. Time Enforcement Commission, organization for which timecops work for, has controlling organization Historical Society of Authenticity. HSA want make sure that TEC doesn't change the past. But who controls HSA?

Movie is quite a mess. Writers have taken some parts that worked from first movie, but they didn't understood the concept. TEC tries to keep time consistent and prevent any changes to it. If this is the case, why they send their agents to past to have vacation? Like staying in history for weeks doesn't change time anyway. HSA people seem to spend lot of time in history too. If they were interested keeping changes minimum, they would not spend so much time in past. Only reason why someone doesn't like agents to spend so much time in past, is that it isn't good for their mental health. Someone from future losing his mind in past doesn't change time at all. This is sequel to the movie that got effects of time travelling most convincing.

Name The Berlin Decision comes from main villains attempt to kill Hitler in Berlin year 1940. Main villain Miller works for HSA and he wants to correct wrongs of the past. Killing Hitler angle is quite unoriginal for time travelling story. What makes this stupid is that, Miller wants to kill Hitler, when it was too late to make major changes. Second World War started year before. The holocaust was set in motion before that. Killing Hitler 1940 wouldn't have changed much. Someone with similar views would have taken his place. In worst case that someone would have been more competent. It was kind of weird, that TEC people in time line where Hitler was killed 1940, didn't know why someone would got to Berlin 1940. Would that mean that history was so bloody in that time line, that second world war was not a major event? Could be because in that time line they were at war.

Our hero is Chang, who has a traumatic event in past. He was there when his father was killed. This time our hero doesn't change his own history like happened in first movie. I am not sure, if that is because his father was killed when he got to there or was it because for changing that, he would had to kill younger Miller. Younger and older Miller stays alive. He changes the future telling young Miller that he could change all that happened. Strangling the older Miller after younger Miller had seen older Miller killing Chang father. That may have made the words more effective. Then we are cut to TEC premises, where everything has returned to normal.

My answer to that age old question, if I would kill Hitler, if it was possible. I would not. Germany was pretty much destined to become radical nation after first world war. If it wasn't Hitler, it would have been someone else. If it wasn't Nazis, it would have been something else. Killing one person, even Hitler, would not have changed that. It could have been communists. What would have cold war looked like, if we didn't have second world war and Germany would have been communistic country? Killing someone, even Hitler, doesn't always make things better. If I wanted to use time travel to prevent second world war, I would have done something to change the Treaty of Versailles. That was what ultimately paved the way for someone like Hitler to gain power and start second world war. I guess this went too deep for movie like Timecop 2.

Timecop (1994)

SPOILER WARNING!!! This post spoils movie Timecop (1994).

Timecop is the best time travelling movie I have ever seen. I don't understand why it is not generally recognized as such. Is it because it is Van Damme movie? Movie is not perfect, but it should get more respect.

I know time travel is just theoretical concept and we can't know how it would change things, if it was possible. As far as modern science understands, there is no way to travel back. Only forward and even that wouldn't be like time traveling you see in movies. More like traveling in fast train, where time goes slower than outside. You could say anything about time travelling in fiction and you don't have any proof that you are correct. It is quite common in fictive time travel that changes in past start chain reaction which changes the future. How much future is changes depends on story. No-one can say how much change is realistic.

Then why I think this is best time travelling movie I have seen? It is because people act like they would act, if time travel was real. You would get someone like Senator McComb changing the past to his advantage. That person would also like to prevent time travel from other. Otherwise others would try to change the past to their advantage and present time would be total mess. When McComb and Walker start their time war, the changes to present are convincing. Every time Walker comes back something has changed and you can see what changes in past changed the future. Like how no-one knows the person with whom he did the last time travel, because McComb changed the past.

Same matter can't occupy same space rule was stupid. CGI when past and present McComb touched each others was terrible. Because that was at the end, it left bad taste to mouth. Rest of the movie didn't have such flaws. You could start nitpicking Parker Datalink Systems angle. After the last time travel Jack Parker is dead and young McComb still owns his shares. Company was called Parker McComb Datalink Systems. Why the name was changed after McComb disappeared? In movie it was changed to show that McComb lost. But in movie's world that didn't make sense. It was clearly pointed out that last fight happened after factory fight where Jack Parker was killed. It makes no sense, unless Walker or someone else cashed the check, but that wasn't shown.

Other than that time travelling made sense. McComb had to change his plans because Walker stopped his plan to get money with little consequences. After that McComb had to play with more risk. At the end even Walker changes his past. I liked scene where he comes home after all this and doesn't know the name of his son because, he lived last ten years in world, where his wife was killed and now he is in world, where that didn't happen. Makes you think, if the wife realize that he is now same Walker that saved her and younger Walker.

This movie has spoiled me. Every time I see time travelling movies, that doesn't change the future as convincing as this did, I feel disappointed. I still can't understand why this movie is rarely mentioned when people discuss about time travelling movies. Terminator movies are mentioned almost always even when their concept has one major flaw.  The reason there are terminators future, which sent terminator to past, is that terminator was sent to past. So terminators came out of nowhere. This movie doesn't have flaws like that.

Looper (2012)

SPOILER WARNING!!! This post spoils movie Looper (2012).

Time travel is invented and made illegal. Criminals have started to use time traveling for exposing bodies. They send one they want dead back in time and in past there is guy killing the person sent back at the time they appear. These killers are called loopers because last person they kill will be their futureself. After they killed their futureself, they get 30 years before they are sent back to be killed. They get their payment in silver with every hit. When they get gold, they know they killed their futureself and closed the loop. If they don't kill their futureself, their employer find them and torture them until futureself comes to employer or kills them. Which ever happens first.

This is quite interesting concept. I how ever see some problems with way they handle this. Movie doesn't tell how present and future communicates. Looper's boss is from future. There is probably time table when people are sent back and boss could have taken that with him, when he came to movie's present. They can follow, if loopers kill they target by checking, if loopers change silver to money. But they don't know when they send loopers futureself back. There is also problem with loopers killing their futureself. Futureself knows how he killed himself in past and tries to prevent that from happening. Another problem is that they have no way to know when loop is closed.

Before anyone says they could have agreed that with looper's boss before he was sent back, I have to mention that Rainmaker started to close loops ahead of time during the movie. How much the future is changed because loops are closed and former loopers do something else? Our protagonist Joe became criminal and killed people after his loop was closed. How to future would change when same gold and silver would exist twice in present. What happens presentself changes futureself. Closing loops ahead of time should change the future, because what released loopers do present will change future by saving and killing different people.

How all the people old Joe killed in present changed the future? Joe is trying to kill one kid to change the future. He just doesn't know which is the correct kid. Okay, the movie doesn't show how future is changed. But it shows what happens to futureself when presentself is hurt. You would assume that cutting fingers would have more impact in 30 years that disappearing fingers. It is like this one change will change the future but all these other changes doesn't. Something like Samuel L. Jackson's Shaft where first and last killing meant something, but every killing in between didn't matter anything.

Time travelling was not explained too well. It seemed that they could send people only 30 year back and they couldn't adjust the time. That could explain why they didn't send unwanted people millions years back in time. That way they would not have needed loopers.

I pointed some problems in this movie's concept. However it is one of best scifi movies lately. Story is main element, not GCI. There are couple scenes in the end, which seem to be out of place. Both having one character becoming too powerful or too killing machine for rest of the story. Both scenes have different character this happens. When you see the movie, you understand which scenes I mean. If all the time travelling doesn't change the future too much, next monday's movie is Jean-Claude Van Damme movie.

Batman: The Dark Knight Returns: Part 2 (2013)

SPOILER WARNING!!! This post spoils movie Batman: The Dark Knight Returns: Part 2 (2013).

This is second part of animated version of Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns. What makes this more interesting now, is that Man of Steel sequel is inspired by that comic. I wrote earlier about first part (http://kvestimovies.wordpress.com/2013/06/13/batman-the-dark-knight-returns-part-1-2012/) . You can watch this without seeing the first one. You miss some background information of couple minor characters. I first part Batman returned. This time we see return of Joker and get some hints what happened to superheroes in this universe.

This starts three months after that. Batman has copy cat gang called Sons of Batman. Joker woke up in mental hospital after he heard Batman has returned. We learn that world is on brink of nuclear holocaust. Superman is now puppet of president. When president is like Ronald Reagan, you can easily tell that source material is from 80's.

After seeing this movie, I started to wait Man of Steel sequel. In this movie Superman is just hitman of President. He fights against Soviet Union for him. He takes care of people who are problematic to government. Superman fights against Batman because Batman helps people better than government. Government doesn't like that. Superman doesn't argue with president. He just goes to fight against Batman. He tries to talk Batman to quit because he makes government to look bad. Superman never thinks that he might be on wrong side and what he does is wrong. He just does what he is told to do.

Superman even starts nuclear war and never thinks it might be his fault. He fights against Soviet Union for control of one island. Because he is too powerful Soviet Union starts nuclear attack. Superman can stop attack before anything is hit. This how ever causes power outages around America and nuclear winter around the world. During following chaos Batman manages to restore order when authorities can't do so. This is too much for president and he sends Superman to take care of Batman.

Whole theme of this movie is how authorities can't do anything right and how they just disturb others doing what they want to do. Whole Joker angle is about this. Joker can murder people when police is fighting against Batman. Everything starts to work out when local police let Batman do his thing. All president does is cause harm. He is overconfident against Soviet Union because Superman works for him. When Soviet Union strikes back, he goes hiding. When Batman makes him and his government look bad, he tells Superman to take care of Batman.

Then the fight. I spoiled it few posts ago. Batman will "win" Superman. If you want to know what I mean by "win" you should watch this movie. Superman was not at his prime because of nuclear blast he received while stopping Soviet nuclear strike and following nuclear winter. Batman had his Iron man like suit. Little help from his friends and some kryptonite. I really want to know how much of this they will take to Man of Steel sequel. Probably only the fighting.

This is must see for every Batman fan as comic is must read for every Batman fan. When you watch this, you see how much influence the comic has had with every Batman movie after 60's Adam West movie. Comic has sequel The Dark Knight Strikes Again. That was published 15 after The Dark Knight Returns. It is also from Frank Miller. I don't remember much more about that than I was disappointed. And I wasn't only one.

Red Dawn (2012)

SPOILER WARNING!!! This post spoils movie Red Dawn (2012).

This is one of those movies which makes you wonder if Hollywood has run out of ideas. Original Red Dawn made some sense since it was made during cold war era when there was realistic enemy. For this movie the enemy was originally China, but then someone realized that chinese people go to movies and there is lot of them. Because enemy in Red Dawn has to be communistic country, they didn't have many countries to choose from. To play it safe they picked country that surely won't let this movie in theaters.

North Korea is not realistic enemy for this kind of movie. Country has a population of about 24 million and it lives few decades behind rest of the world. It is really hard to believe how they could invade country of 316 million with most advanced military, North Korea can't feed its own people. How it could invade much larger, richer and advanced country? China would have been more realistic enemy, but their money was too tempting. Not to mention that movie maker probably had to use some services provided by chinese people. At this day and age everything is so economically connected that there is hard to find good enemies for this kind of movies. Which makes you wonder why this was made.

If we forget how unrealistic the enemy is, we get movie that doesn't try to make us connect to main characters. I am not target audience for this movie. So I need something more than american football game and bar scene. Characters doesn't have any personalities. There is one kid whose personality is that he is black and mayor's son. We don't learn anything more about him. Two brothers are only ones with little bit personalities. Older is marine, who is on vacation from Iraq. Younger lost football game and loves blond girl. When someone questions why older brother is leader, he attacks the kid. Like he wasn't only one in the group trained to fight in war. No. Violence is better way. That was about all we learned from their personalities. Then there is one girl who likes older brother. When older brother accepts that girl likes him and say something positive about his brother, we know that he is going to die in few seconds. This movie is not about characters. We don't care when we learned that Mayor's Son was bugged and rest had to leave him. They just leave him with weapons and we don't see him again.

Then we get to third problem of this movie. Movie knows that it is too close to situation in Irak and Afghanistan. Older brother even mentions how they are the bad guys now. This limits what movie can do, Another thing that makes you wonder why this movie was made. Probably someone thought this could be heroic pro-american movie and then they realized during making the movie, that they can't follow the original idea for several reasons. By that time it was too late to cancel, It is like this movie couldn't do anything it wanted and we are left without anything interesting. There is no character development. Life under occupation is not shown. Our heroes can't be too heroic because that could send a wrong message. Story is uninteresting. Original movie was not a masterpiece, but it was interesting because they could do what they wanted.

This movie totally missed the thing that is most interesting to me in North Korea. How leaders can keep country isolated when they know how much better things are outside the country? Is there something structural in system that keeps everyone prisoner inside the country or doesn't elite want to let go their power even when it meant that everyone would be better off in long run? If North Korea ever invaders other country, how would solders react when they see how much better things are outside their country?

Peter Capaldi - 12th Doctor

Another one of these. I am not making this habit if every weekend doesn't bring interesting announcements. Last sunday it was BBC who announced who is the next Doctor. Here what I think about it.

I haven't written anything about Doctor Who. Here is a little introduction for those who doesn't know the show. First of all, there is no character called Doctor Who. He is The Doctor. There have been separate movies where character was Doctor Who, but in tv it has always been The Doctor. Doctor is Time Lord, time travelling alien, who can regenerate himself when he would die otherwise. Regeneration changes Doctor's body and mind. It also means different actor in role and change of the series' tone. In classic series it was told that time lords can regenerate 12 times. However rival time lord, The Master, used all his regenerations and was able to take another body which he could regenerate. I don't know how much new Doctor Who follows that rule. After all we have already seen 14 doctors already in series. Peter Capaldi will be 12th regular Doctor. Sixth Doctor saw future Doctor in The Trial of a Time Lord and 50th anniversary special has one new character called The Doctor.

One more thing before I can get to my points. Doctor has human companion or companions during his travels. Companions bring human aspect to stories. These are people that Doctor meets on his travels and who start to hang with Doctor. Companions change more often than Doctor. It rarely happens that both Doctor and companions change at same time.

Peter Capaldi will replace Matt Smith. I haven't seen last season of Doctor Who yet. So my opinion of Matt Smith is based on his first two seasons. Matt Smith himself replaces one of best Doctors ever, David Tennant. Tennant was perfect for role and writes knew how to write for him. I think problem with Matt Smith is that all writer doesn't know how to write for him. Ninth Doctor Christopher Eccleston had same problems, but he could act better even when script didn't suit him. He however left after one season. I think that is great shame because I think he could have done better if others had listened him and made Doctor more suitable for him. Ninth Doctor should have been tougher. Eleventh would needed older actor or stories that suited actor of Matt's age. Both had great episodes, at times something was missing.

Another problem with Matt Smith was that he was new Doctor with all new companions. Tennant's last companion, Donna, wouldn't have worked with Smith. It is strange that they didn't introduce new companions during Tennant's special episode run. They had time to do that. In stead they gave us Doctor Who where everything is new. It also didn't help that stories seemed bit rushed at times and we little bit too extraordinary and cosmic.

Doctor Who fans know Peter Capaldi from episode Fires of Pompeii. I will write more about that in near future. It is quite interesting now when we know Capaldi will be next Doctor. I am looking forward for Capaldi's doctor. We don't know anything about it yet. How ever one thing is sure. They have to slow down because Capaldi is much older than Matt Smith. That is only a good thing. Slower and more thinking doctor is what we need. Those who say Capaldi is too old haven't seen classic series. Back then The Doctor was not the one doing the heavy lifting and running.

I don't know if they are planning to end series. I have no idea what they do with John Hurt's Doctor in 50th Anniversary. If he turns out to be one regeneration, then he or Capaldi will be the last one. I think everyone has forgotten future Doctor I mentioned earlier. If they plan to end Doctor Who then older Doctor like Capaldi suits for that. He is also closing to end his career, so he could be long Doctor unlike previous two, who have left to make career outside Doctor Who.

I think this was good choise for Doctor Who. Out of all possible actors mentioned in speculation I would have chosen Jason Statham, I know he has his film career going on and he wouldn't let that go for tv series, but he would have been interesting as The Doctor. We have not seen though guy Doctor. Ninth teased with that idea, but they didn't go that way. Statman could be ultime bad A** Doctor. In dialog they have mentioned how scary Doctor can be. With Statman we would have seen that.

The Prophecy: Forsaken (2005)

SPOILER WARNING!!! This post spoils movie The Prophecy: Forsaken (2005).

This is fifth and currently last movie in The Prophecy franchise. Straight to dvd as was The Prophecy: Uprising. This movie was made right after Uprising and follows events of Uprising story wise. To be exact Allison, Satan, Satan's place and the Lexicon is from first movie. Everything else is forgotten. There is no mention of brother. I guess this happens in Romania too, but this doesn't mention it and all events could happen anywhere. If Uprising didn't have much visual effect, this have even less. Lack of effect is replaced by mob of gangster looking angels when you should feel a supernatural threat.

This time is angel named Stark. He wants to prevent apocalypse, because he doesn't want humans to heaven and taking God's love from angels. When Satan explains Start's motivations it felt like he was talking part of himself. I mean that complete Satan would be a combination of this movie's Satan and Stark. Or then I have forgotten how christianity represents Satan.

Allison is still protecting the Lexicon, book that writes itself. She is doing really bad job. She has destroyed the book already. She has taken covers off to create decoy and in the end she spreads pages of book all over the town. She talks about saving the book even after she had thrown half of the pages away. The book didn't make sense. Why it still wrote itself after it was destroyer. Text just appeared to pages. Angel did know when events were written and which events were written. But they didn't know what exactly was written. They knew the book like you know this blog post appear here today at the hour it appeared and that it would be about The Prophecy: Forsaken (2005). Was it advertised somewhere?

Angel knew when name of antichrist would appear to the book. They wanted to know that so they could kill him before he starts apocalypse. It was mentioned that name would appear to last page. It was also mentioned that the book would tell about end times. End times must be really short if name of the one that starts apocalypse in mentioned first time at the last page. Does the book get more pages as it is written? What would happen now when all the pages are speared all over the town where any one can pick them? That could create interesting sequel where common people find self-writing pages and bad guys hunt them down.

This time most interesting character is Dylan, a hitman who works for Stark but tries to break free from Stark's control. Others are what you could expect from low-budget straight to dvd movie. This is more like first three movies than previous was. Last two movies were made same time. I guess that is why previous movie was prophecy movie.

The Prophecy IV: Uprising (2005)

SPOILER WARNING!!! This post spoils movie The Prophecy IV: Uprising (2005).

I didn't know that Prophecy series is so popular that you add that name to this movie. Prophecy movies were slightly entertaining because of Christopher Walken and religious imagery. I don't remember first one. Second and third were small budget effect horror movies. This is first one without Christopher Walken. It also throws away the rules of earlier movies. Name and religious imagery are from earlier movie but otherwise this has nothing to do with those movies. Makes you wonder why this is called Prophecy IV. This was straight to dvd-release. I guess someone thought that name would sell. It and Kari Wuhrer made me watch this. I liked her in Red Alert 2 games. This time she has more serious role.

This movie happens in Romania. What is good in this movie is that story has elements from history of Romania. Those parts are best parts of the movie. Characters talk local language at the beginning. It was nice touch. But that won't last long. After short while even Romanians start to talk english to each others.

Movie starts quite confusing. It starts to make more sense at it goes on. Dani Simionescu is bad cop who robs drug dealers and give money to church. He met mysterious stranger who knows things about his history. Soon they got to crime scene where they found one of the drug dealers Dani stole money from. Drug dealer is without heart. Allison works for church. She find the Lexicon, book that writes itself, next to dead priest. For unexplained reason she takes the book. It is not explained what she did with dead priest. Villain of movie is Belial, demon who moves from body to body and takes heart from earlier host after changing body.

We learn that Dani gave information about his parents to secret police during time of communism. Secret police tortured and killed his parents. Now he tries to buy salvation by robbing money from criminals and giving it to church. Allison is her sister who was adopted after secret police killed their parents. This storyline had potential but it was not used well. It was used to build character of Dani. When Dani and Allison meet and find out who they are the main story is more important that brother seeking forgiveness and sister trying work out dramatic death of her parents and betrayal of her brother. Something like one minute was given to this.

Then we got final battle between Belial and mysterious stranger, who we know by now is Satan.It is interesting that Satan is kind of good guy in this movie and villain is demon who wants to go further than Satan. Final battle is anticlimactic. There is no real battle. Just talking. they build interesting relationships between characters but didn't use it at all.

This might sound strange, but I want to see high budget remake of this movie. This movie has so much unused potential. Sean Pertwee, who plays Dani, is only one who does a good job. Satan was worst disappointment. Role needed better actor. Belial was quite uneven. Only last actor did good job. I can't stop thinking what this could have been if it was made darker with better actors, better dialog and bigger budget. If only this script had been used to make own movie and not fourth Prophecy movie.